Good Morning Mr. Sidibeh, i totally agree with you
that these negotiations should have been keept secret
to the end and the UDP/NRP Alliance believe the same
but it is on the contrary for NADD.

The first correspondence between UDP/NADD Alliance and
NADD was published by FOROYAA NEWSPAPER on their Issue
NO. 61/2006, 4-6 August, 2006 then the online
newspapers pick it from there.

See below the following FOROYAA NEWSPAPER publication,
then you will be able to tell who first lick the
correspondences on the internet.

Please, it is your role to advice your party.  

Thanks.
Saihou




Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue

Issue No.64/2006, 11-13 August, 2006

 

Editorial

ANOTHER EVIDENCE OF IEC’S DISREGARD OF THE
CONSTITUTION IN DETERMINING THE DATE FOR PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION

Section 43(1)(d) states that subject to the provisions
of the constitution the Independent Electoral
Commission shall be responsible for ensuring that the
dates, times and places of public elections and
referenda are determined in accordance with law and
that they are publicized and elections held
accordingly.

This means that a competent Independent Electoral
Commission should know the letter and spirit of the
Constitution and should perform their duties in line
with its provisions. FOROYAA has always maintained
that September 22 falls short of the constitutional
requirements to hold a presidential election.

The most glaring confirmation of FOROYAA’s view is the
Bill published to amend the Constitution which was
also amended in 2001. Section 63(2) states that “The
person elected President shall assume office sixty
days following the day of his or her election…”
Needless to say, since the term of office of a
President lasts for five years President Jammeh’s term
ends on 18th December 2006. If the president elected
on 22nd September is to assume office under the
Constitution he/she would have to do so on 22nd
November 2006, a month before the end of term of
office of the President.

This is why the state is trying to amend section
63(2). In the object of the amendment the Executive
states that the Bill seeks to amend section 63(2) of
the Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia, which
duly restricts the date for a presidential election by
providing that an elected president shall assume
office sixty days following the day of his or her
election.” The implication of that provision is that
the election must be fixed on a particular day that
satisfies both the sixty days requirement and the
expiration of the term of office of the President.” 
These are the very words of the Executive. It is clear
to them that to meet the constitutional requirement
the election must take place two months before the
expiration of the term of office of the President. Why
did the IEC put the date to 22 September 2006?

We hope the IEC will now review all the decisions they
have taken, engage the Inter-Party Committee in
discussion and seek proper legal advice in determining
new dates for elections.

In our view to leave an incumbent to stay in office
for three months after he/she has lost an election
does not make democratic sense. What is logical is to
hold elections two days before the expiration of the
term of office of the incumbent so that whoever wins
an election will assume office the following day after
the announcement of the results. The constitutional
amendments should have been geared towards such a
development.

 

 

NADD AND UDP/NRP VIEWS ON UNITY

NADD Executive Secretary

Dear Colleague,

Your letter ref. NADD/FA/02/02/06 of 6th August 2006
refers.

The joint Executive Committee of the UDP/NRP respects
NADD’s decision to reject the proposals emanating from
it.

The UDP/NRP Alliance wishes to draw NADD’s attention
to the fact that legally UDP/NRP cannot be part or
members of NADD. The NADD Executive seems to be
ignoring the decision of the Supreme Court in the case
of Sallah and others Vs. The Clerk of the National
Assembly and others. The suggestion that UDP/NRP
Alliance is to state categorically whether it is
willing to join NADD is a suggestion that fails to
recognize the legal position that parties cannot form
or be members of political parties. Although Mr. Hamat
Bah and Mr. Ousainu Darboe and indeed any other
Gambian is free and entitle to join NADD the political
party under whose umbrella you propose to sponsor
candidates for any election the reality of

the matter is that neither Mr. Bah nor Mr. Darboe is
willing to resign their membership of their parties to
rejoin NADD.

The leadership of the UDP/NRP Alliance is very
conversant with the laws of The Gambia and in
particular laws regulating and governing election
matters. Probably if the views of some people who are
part of the UDP/NRP Alliance were heeded the legal and
constitutional mess created by the registration of
NADD would have been averted. The UDP/NRP Alliance is
not seeking and has never sought power for its sake.
It is an Alliance that is genuinely committed to the
amelioration of the worsening conditions in all
aspects in The Gambia.

Finally I regard your rejection, without any
discussion, of our proposal as a rejection of our
invitation to meet and discuss and this we accept in
good faith.

Yours in the service of the truth.

A.N.M. OUSAINU DARBOE

 (For UDP/NR.P Alliance)

 

NADD’S RESPONSE

Dear Mr. Darboe,

ON THE CONTENTIOUS ISSUES RAISED IN YOUR LETTER

Your memorandum of 7th July has been received. 

The Executive Committee of NADD respects your decision
not to be part of the NADD compact. Of course NADD
cannot be part of the expanded UDP/NRP Alliance since
the two parties were part and parcel of NADD’s
political arrangement. 

However, the Executive Committee of NADD was very much
disappointed that you proceeded to indicate in no
uncertain terms that the Supreme Court case Sallah vs
the Clerk of the National Assembly and others has
barred the UDP/NRP alliance from stating categorically
its  terms and conditions for re-engaging NADD. The
Executive Committee will convey its rejection of your
political interpretation of the Supreme Court decision
and its immense revulsion for your description of the
greatest demonstration of political will by the
opposition by registering NADD as an umbrella party,
as a legal and constitutional mess. I decided to seek
authorization from the Executive Committee to address
such issues with greater clarity since you claim that
the registration of NADD was against your advice.

Mr. Darboe, even though I, Halifa Sallah, was not
around when the NADD Executive Committee sent papers
to IEC for registration of NADD, even though as
Minority Leader in the National Assembly and member of
the Pan-African parliament I had more to lose in terms
of post than any member of NADD when our seats were
declared vacant, even though there had not been the
slightest indication that I will be made flag-bearer
before the court decision, I did not hesitate to tell
the whole world that the registration of NADD was a
blessing in disguise. The reason for this is simple. 

It is incontrovertible that once the MOU was signed by
the representatives of all the political parties to
establish NADD its registration became mandatory in
order to give relevance to its letter and spirit. Let
me refer you to the MOU to buttress my point.

Article 16 of the MOU states that “The Alliance shall
have an emblem, colour, motto and symbol to be
determined within one month of the coming into force
of the agreement with the full participation of its
supporters and sympathizers.”

Suffice it to say that Article 8 also adds that “The
selection of the candidate of the Alliance for
presidential, National Assembly and council elections
shall be done by consensus, provided that in the event
of an impasse selection shall be done by holding a
primary election restricted to party delegates on the
basis of equal number of delegates, comprising the
chairwoman and youth leader of each party from each
village/ward in the constituency.”

Mr. Darboe, you have mastered the chapter and verse of
your profession. I do not need to quote section 60 of
the Constitution to prove that the registration of
NADD was connected with, dependent on and determined
by the letter and spirit of the Memorandum of
Understanding that all parties signed in public
knowing fully well what its contents were. NADD had to
be registered in order for us to contest under its
ticket. This is the requirement of the Constitution
and the Elections Decree. Hence the attempt to
register NADD was not a constitutional or legal
blunder; on the contrary, it was a constitutional and
legal necessity. 

Hence anyone who sees the registration of NADD as a
legal and constitutional mess must equally consider
his/her signing of the memorandum of understanding as
a historical blunder or folly. If signing the MOU is
considered a blunder where lies the integrity of its
signatories.

In short, before we agreed on the content of the MOU
we set up a technical committee comprising the experts
of all the political parties. Your party was
represented by people of high intellectual calibre.
Within the technical committee were former permanent
secretaries and people with PhD. As far as I am
concerned, the signing of the Memorandum of
Understanding and the registration of NADD were the
highest demonstration of political will by the
opposition to bring about democratic change in the
Gambia. We proved that we were determined to unite for
change regardless of the peril or the cost. I must
admit that the UDP representatives earned my trust for
the diligent way they participated in the work of the
technical committee. We should not rewrite history
because of the momentary convenience and rob such
honourable intellectuals of due credit. The
determination mustered by all to consolidate NADD was
manifested after the court decision.

After our seats were declared vacant, we again had
opportunity to dismantle NADD and return to contest
the by-elections under our respective parties. We were
given ample time to make our decisions. We concluded
that our different parties will remain allies while we
allow the Executive Members to remain in NADD so that
it could serve as an umbrella party. This is why all
Executive Members of the various parties symbolically
resigned from their parties to remain Executive
Committee Members of NADD. This again was the second
most important demonstration of political will, by the
opposition to ensure unity. It earned us the respect
and admiration of the electorate for not being self
seekers.

The sacrifice paid dividend. We did not only win our
seats back, the APRC regime became so threatened that
it had to arrest members of the NADD leadership which
gave rise to its total national and international
isolation. The coming of President Obasanjo, the
signing of the memorandum of understanding and the
massive solidarity NADD received nationally and
internationally confirmed that it was the best
instrument to utilize to contest the 2006 presidential
election. 

Mr. Darboe, the fact that Mr. Bah left NADD at a time
when he was pursuing an election petition as a NADD
candidate confirms where the political and strategic
blunder originated from.

We first stood by NADD with an iron will. It became an
invincible rock which was split by your withdrawal.
This is why NADD has done everything to open its doors
for re-engagement. It is therefore immensely amazing
that you would conclude that you regard our rejection
of your proposal as a rejection of all invitation to
discuss. I will leave the NADD Executive to clarify
its point.

As far as I am concerned, I have engaged you in a very
honest and sincere discussion because of my conviction
that an alliance is the best mechanism to contest the
2006 elections. An alliance on NADD’s terms provides
conditions that we have all signed to honour. An
alliance on UDP/NRP terms is yet to be defined in form
and content. This is the point. NADD gave you the
option of making proposal on how one of your parties
should declare its desire to lead an opposition
alliance and then offer its terms to other opposition
parties for consideration rather than hide behind the
cloak of an expanded UDP/NRP alliance which can never
be known to the law.

To show you that as a flagbearer of NADD I have always
been opened to principled compromise, I would like to
give an example of how to make our discussion
relevant, realistic, and indispensable. In a word,
would you agree to a proposal for NADD and the UDP/NRP
Alliance to draw a list of possible candidates and
then select a group of prominent Gambians to select
one among their number to be a compromise candidate
for the presidential elections. This candidate can be
restricted to a term of 2 or 3 years to implement a
rectification programme and prepare the country for
free and fair elections.

Secondly, it gave you the option of revisiting the MOU
establishing NADD.

Thirdly, it gave you the option of giving form and
content to the UDP/NRP alliance to enable us to
determine how it could be engaged without being an
expanded part of it. 

How you can interpret these positions as closing the
doors for discussion beats my imagination. 

Secondly, since the flag-bearer of your alliance wants
no restriction to his term in office to a five year
term, would you accept an arrangement where the NADD
flag-bearer becomes the presidential candidate and sit
for three or five years while a system embodying a
prime minister is introduced to enable the flag-bearer
of the UDP/NRP alliance to head a coalition
government. The president will be barred from seeking
a second term while the prime minister is allowed to
seek the normal term of the presidency. These are the
type of concrete proposals we expect from you as we
race against time.

I would want your opinion on these proposals before
Saturday 12th August 2006. In the meantime, we are
going ahead with our preparations to put up a
candidate. If you end up being found to have taken an
irreversible decision to contest the election on your
own terms, we will leave history to deliver its
verdict. 

If I fail to receive a positive response or a concrete
proposal by Saturday I will issue a statement to call
on the Gambian people to give full support to my
candidature as the NADD flag-bearer.

To conclude allow me to say that history has record of
the fact that we signed a Memorandum based on
commitment. We registered NADD based on conviction. We
lost our seats but still decided to stand under a NADD
ticket based on conviction. NADD still exists because
of that conviction to unite and bring about the
minimum standard of democracy necessary to enable the
people to take charge of their destiny and free
themselves from impunity and self perpetuating rule in
order to live in liberty and prosperity.

I hope we have reached a common understanding of what
actually happened. If you disagree with my view I will
be honoured if we meet at Father Farrell Hall to put
our different positions to an audience in the interest
of transparency and accountability, as we prepare the
ground to challenge the APRC regime. We should clear
the ground once and for all and restore the climate of
respect that has always characterized our
relationship. 

Yours in the service of the Nation.

Halifa Sallah








--- Momodou S Sidibeh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Mr. Mballow,
> 
> I recognise that it is not my prerogative to impress
> on the UDP/NRP alliance 
> how they should go about informing concerned
> Gambians all over the world as 
> to the alliances undertakings.
> 
> Besides, I am a strong supporter of a principle of
> organisation called 
> democratic centralism. But these are supposed be
> private discussions between 
> leaders of the oppsosition, suposed to determine the
> future of our country. 
> They concern views and positions relating to the
> possibilities for a 
> coalition. As a citizen, I do not think it wise that
> all aspects of these 
> exchanges should be placed on the internet; and I do
> hope that only a zero 
> number of Gambians are still out there waiting to
> make up their minds about 
> which way to vote by wisdom derived from reading
> these exchanges. Thank You
> 
> Good morning,
> Momodou S Sidibeh
> 
>
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
> postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
> at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
> 
> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
> To contact the List Management, please send an
> e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]
>
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤