Issue No. 69/2004, 30th August - 1st September 2004

EDITORIAL

THE INTEGRITY OF THE STATE IS AT STAKE!!

JAMMEH MUST ACT

There are decent governments and decent opposition parties. There are also
rogue governments and rogue opposition parties. Decent governments run
states on the basis of decent laws. They allow public administration to be
conducted on the basis of public interest and individual merit. They
maintain armed, security and law enforcement forces, which are loyal to
the people and could serve under any government put into office by the
people. Decent governments open up the state media to divergent views and
promotes a culture of accountability and transparency in public
administration. A rogue government will operate like a political mafia.
Power becomes personalized. Cliques develop in public administration where
offices are occupied on the basis of personal loyalties rather than merit.
Law becomes irrelevant. Might or impunity becomes institutionalized.  Fear
and coercion become weapons to promote submission to the rulers. Armies
and security and police forces develop cliques who assume powers beyond
that accorded by rank. These cliques are given autonomy to act to suppress
any descent within or outside of the forces. Such people can perform
atrocities of all dimensions with impunity. Decent Opposition Parties are
those which aim to promote Nationalism in the face of the onslaught of an
indecent government, give confidence to the people and assure them of the
building of a country based on democratic norms and a government that is
sensitive to all the reasonable and just demands of the citizenry. Such
parties would give hope of the emergence of a future that will not lead to
victimization but would safeguard the interest of the citizenry and do
justice to all. A rogue opposition is one, which seeks to remove a
government only to establish all the conditions that makes a government to
be apt to be described as a rogue government.
It is important to emphasize that any government, which maintains a
private or secret force outside the ambit of the law, is a rogue
government. Such a government can earn no respect and members of such
secret armies end up being tried as war criminals. Leaders of rogue
governments become pariah in the world who ends up receiving commands to
seek asylum elsewhere like the Menghistus of Ethiopia and Charles Taylor
of Liberia and so on.
Jammeh must take the arson attacks against the media seriously. Immediate
action must be taken to come to the truth. This truth should be known to
all. If this fails to happen his government will qualify to be classified
as a rogue government. The end result is incalculable. All those who are
linked to the government should engage in a serious debate on the arson
attack and come up with a credible way forward. The issue is not about
Hamat Bah’s parliamentary immunity. The issue is about the Arson attacks
and the need to conduct genuine investigation to come to the truth. We
also hope that The Independent will call a meeting with other media houses
to give them all the facts in their possession. We hope Hamat will also
meet all the political figures to give them all the facts in his
possession. This matter requires concerted effort. None should panic. All
decent Gambians should act in unison to nip this in the bud and save our
country from sinking into a pariah state where might becomes right until
the law of the jungle breeds a state of ungovernability and statelessness
just like what Sierra Leone and Liberia were. Jammeh must act now to save
the situation. The whole nation have their eyes open to see what will
happen next. Silence is unacceptable at this juncture. Words are
meaningless. It is action that should speak the clear language that decent
people in the Gambia and the world can have confidence in.


The Independent’s Case

”It is a case for the military police and the Commander-in-Chief” Halifa
Sallah

In this interview, Halifa Sallah speaks on the allegations by Hamat Bah
and The Independent and how the government stands at the moment in
relation to the Alliance/Coalition.

Speaking to FOROYAA on the allegation that Corporal Sanna Sanyang and
Corporal Sheriff Guissey were among the arsonists who destroyed the
printing press of The Independent, Halifa Sallah said that he was at first
concerned when he heard the allegations from Hamat. He added: ”National
Assembly members have parliamentary immunity regarding what they say but
if our information is not credible we can equally be taken to task in the
press. When we make allegations against citizens in the press they can
equally counter our allegations and call us liars in the press. This is
why the immunity is not a licence to tell lies since our integrity can
also be called into question if we do not speak the truth.

FOROYAA: How did you react afterwards?

Halifa: I made enquiries from Sam Sarr whether the journalists had raised
the allegations at their meeting with the National Security Council. As
far as I was concerned, the allegations made the case to be for the
military police and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Gambia is
known to be maintaining a respectable national army, which is taking part
in peacekeeping missions. If their allegations of hooliganism and banditry
which are against the Armed Forces Act are true, then immediate action
must be taken by the armed forces to clear its record either by capturing
and isolating all the culprits or proving beyond doubt that the
allegations are unfounded.

FOROYAA: How do you see the developments so far?

Halifa: It is remarkable to read statements of the editors of The
Independent and hear the weak response to Hamat Bah’s allegations. The
issue is not about exploiting parliamentary immunity. Hamat made a
statement. It is for the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces to put his
own investigating machinery in motion to come up with a credible statement
to confirm or counter what Hamat Bah had said.
As for the editors of The Independent, I must congratulate the editors for
their strength. Many would have been frightened to seek asylum elsewhere
if they had the information they have lived with for months. Now that they
have decided to share their experience, the media fraternity should appeal
for a second meeting with the National Security Council. The Council
should advise the president to either get the military police to take up
the matter with speed or set up a commission of inquiry so that all those
against whom allegations are made and their accusers could testify.

FOROYAA: How should the citizens behave in the face of such uncertainty?

Halifa: I have always said that terrorists become more powerful if they
succeed in creating a climate of fear and alarm. Those who use such
tactics expect to frighten the citizenry into submission. People must see
these terrorists as an undignified and unenlightened few who accept to be
the running dogs of their fellow human being. No dignified and conscious
Gambian would accept to bark and bite for the pleasure of their fellow
Gambian. We must isolate the few and wage a campaign against them in order
to restore sanity. There are decent and indecent people in all sectors. We
must encourage the decent people in our security forces and make them
prevail against the wicked. Such people should know that they would
prosper on the basis of merit under any government, which rewards merit
instead of impunity.
Governments which reward impunity and those who become willing agents have
no future. In my view, the more Jammeh ignores such impunity, the more he
pushes decent Gambians who want a decent society into the camp of the
Alliance/Coalition. The country is standing between despair and hope. If
people are convinced that Jammeh’s government can only bring despair they
should also bear in mind that the Alliance/Coalition can give hope. There
is therefore no room for despair.

FOROYAA: How do you see the National Assembly?

Halifa: The lesson is clear to all that if we had no opposition in the
National Assembly there are many exposures that would have been hidden
under the carpet. I would like to give a comprehensive review of our last
meeting.

Note: See next issue for such a review under the heading, ”The
Controversial Developments in the National Assembly.”


NO UN VISITORS FOR BABA K. JOBE

According to eye witnesses between 3 to 4 PM on Saturday 21st August a
state guard by the name Ousman Babou was beaten by a mob in Fajikunda
Layout. The State Guard was then reportedly carrying a fully loaded AK 47
rifle. According to reports the state guard entered the compound insulting
and uttering the words, ”Come out, I will kill you.” He is reported to
have told one Buba a resident of that home that he had come to kill him
because of what he did to his boy, Ansumana. The reports continued to say
that Buba then replied by saying ”You can shoot me”.
At this point a crowd emerged. They grabbed the rifle and seized it from
him and beat him up. They then proceeded to take him to Bundung Police
Station but found some military officers at the Latrikunda Petrol Station
to whom the beaten soldier was handed. The officers are reported to have
taken him to Yundum Barracks.
This reporter got in touch with Buba Badjie who confirmed narration. He
claimed that earlier on three of them namely Ousman Babou, Ansumana
Drammeh and Sergeant Salif Jawo came to Buba Badjie’s home. He went on to
say that the three claimed they were sent by a Senior Officer from Bakau
Barracks to search Buba’s house for drugs. According to Buba the search
was conducted and no drugs were found. He added that they misbehaved
themselves and then left due to the pressure of a crowd that had gathered.
He said further stated that Ansumana came back alone with a dagger
pointing out that he had come to revenge. After the pressure of the crowd
he left. However, Ousman Babou soon returned with an AK 47 rifle fully
loaded and putting on uniform. Then followed the incident as stated
earlier.


PURPORTED TORTURE VICTIM ON TRIAL

Seedy Fanneh a resident of Brikama Madina who had complained of torture by
the Police at Brikama Police Station on Monday 23rd August 2004 appeared
before the Magistrate Court in Brikama Western Division. But the Court
Clerk told him that his case would be heard the following day, as the case
was not registered for hearing.
On Tuesday 24th when the case was mentioned by First Class 1617
representing the I.G.P in court read the charges against the accused as
follows: -
1. Causing a Breach Of The Peace on the 1st July 2004 the accused was
walking along the Brikama Serekunda Highway conducting himself in a manner
that can cause the breaking of the peace and the stability of the state.
He said Seedy was heard insulting the President of the Republic that he is
foolish and senseless.
The second charge was that the accused unlawfully escaped from lawful
custody while under custody at the Brikama Police Station.
When the accused, Seedy Fanneh was called by the Magistrate Bubacarr Jawo
to answer to the charges. He pleaded not guilty to both counts.

Inspector Jawo Testifies

In giving his evidence to the courts Omar Jawo Chief Inspector and also
the Station Officer at Brikama Police Station told the court that 1st July
2004 at about 12 mid night he was sitting just outside the gate of the
station, just in front with one Corporal 1496 Bojang together with one
lady Ndeye Fatou Demba where he saw the accused coming from the market
towards the Police Station shouting and insulting President Jammeh saying
he is a foolish and senseless man and that the by election in Jarra is a
lesson for the President. The witness added that he said Fanneh was saying
this he entered the Police Station and passed him with Corporal 1496
Bojang and asked for the Police. ”Where are the Police?” Fanneh asked them
according to the witness. He said Fanneh added: ”Who ever talks among you
I will cut out your penis”. As the Station officer I have to order for his
arrest, which was done by Corporal 1496 Bojang. Jawo went on to say that
after his arrest he was charged for the particulars of offence.” According
to Jawo the accused was later granted bail.
He said on the 9th July 2004 ”I ordered him to be charged for not coming
to report for 3-4 days.” The accused he said escaped and ran away for two
days. The Station Officer said he also gave his statement to the Police.
For his part when asked by the court whether he had heard all what the
Inspector had said he answered in the positive and said he did not accept
all what he said. But he told the court that he has a lawyer by the name
Ousainou Darboe who could not appear in court because the Police have been
giving him dates, which were not honoured. He said he did not inform his
lawyer, as he was not told that the case would be mentioned that day. At
this point the Magistrate said that it is his constitutional right to have
a counsel and the case was adjourned till the 13th September 2004.
He was asked to try and inform his counsel. The accused was also granted
bail in the sum of D5000.00 with a Gambian surety.



The Paul Commission

The Paul commission entered its second face of enquiry of probing into the
assets of civil servants and other public officers from July 1994 to date.
It could be recalled that the commission started its activities with the
Ministers or SoS’s under the ARPRC and APRC on Monday 19th July, and on
the 24th of August 2004, the commission started to call Permanent
Secretaries of different state departments of state. The first PS to be
called was Abdourahman Cole of the Interior and on the 25th was the turn
of Bai Ousman Secka currently at Defence and Saidou Sinay Jallow currently
at Works & Infrastructure.

Evidence of Bai Ousman Secka

The witness said his names are Bai Ousman Secka living at Old Jeshwang in
the KMC; that he is the current PS of Defence. He confirmed receiving a
declaration form from the commission, which he had filled and returned to
the commission. He was shown the form, which he confirmed, and when
tendered, it was marked Ext A. Mr. Secka then went on to give a break down
of the various positions he had held from 1994 to date. He said he had
been DPS Tourism from 1994 - 1995, 1995-1996 DPS Foreign Affairs, 96-98 PS
Foreign Affairs, 98-2000 Commissioner LRD, 2000-2001 PS Tourism, 2001-2003
Ambassador Senegal with accreditations to Mali, Mauritania, Guinea
Conakry, etc, 2003-2004 PS Tourism and Culture on his return and 2004
March to date PS Health.
On whether he can furnish the commission with his salaries for the various
posts he had held from 1994, Mr. Secka said he had not got with him the
appointment letters, but that currently his earning are D8,091. On what he
had been receiving as DPS Tourism onwards, Mr. Secka said he cannot
remember, but that as DPS it was grade 11 and PS is grade 12; that as
Ambassador in Senegal he was receiving D13,000. He denied bringing any
foreign exchange on his return from Senegal as Ambassador; that he is not
involved in any gainful business and does not hold brief for anyone’s
business. He further said he did not have any loan from the government nor
any individual.
Mr. Secka then confirmed having made several overseas trips and that he
sometimes makes savings out of his per diem on return. He said those
savings are later spent on general family expenses e.g. building, etc. The
state counsel Fagbenle then asked him if he is engaged in building at the
moment, which Secka confirmed. On where he is living at Old Jeshwang Mr.
Secka said he is renting since his own house, which he is building in
1995, is not ready 1995. Further on the total he had received as per diem
from 1994 to date, the witness asked for 7 days to enable him get the
facts from the various departments of state. The permission was granted
but was told that he needed to apply through the commission. Bai Ousman
however denied an allegation made by the former SoS for Tourism and
culture Yankuba Touray that he had discussed the issue of Edmundo
restaurant. He also denied ever surcharging anybody for a mismanaged fund;
he confirmed being a member of the GTA and that it is the board of the GTA
that has the powers to allocate land in TDA. He however was quick to add
that the SoS has the veto power in any decision of the board. Mr. Secka
denied having any knowledge of 90 pounds mentioned by the counsel. On the
diverting of the monthly expenses of the GTA Mr. Secka said he was not in
office at the time; that when he came in, one thing that was clear was
that the funds were directed wrongly by somebody. The witness and the
state counsel continued to talk in paradox without mentioning any names.
For the media to know the real issue, Mr. Secka denied ever being aware of
any irregular transfer of funds from GTA accounts.
On whether his wife is engaged in any business, the witness replied that
the wife had inherited business from her mother. He agreed that his wife
was in business well before 1994; that she contributes in all-family
expenses, but he denied paying any money into the wife’s account nor does
she have any dealings with his account.  He further said that she banks
with the standard bank and he banks with the trust bank since 1994. The
commission then ordered that Mr. Secka to supply the commission with all
the bank statements of himself, the wife and all expenses on their
children’s education.

Evidence Of Mr. Saidou Sinay Jallow

The witness gave his name as Saidou Sinay Jallow living in Banjulinding
and that by the 1994 take over he was out of the country; that on his
return in 1995 he went back to the Gambia College up to 1998, when he
became Director of Tertiary Education at the department of education up to
2001. He confirmed receiving a form from the commission, which he had
filled and returned. The form was tendered and marked Ext. A. Mr. Jallow
then went on to say that he became PS Tourism 2001 - 2003 and 2004 PS at
works. On his earnings while he was director tertiary education, Mr.
Jallow said he was receiving a total of D16800 as his salary and cost of
his consultancies for St. Mary’s University of Halifax. For his salary as
PS he said he received D8000 - D9000 monthly. When asked if that includes
allowances when he was at Tourism, Mr. Jallow replied that as PS Tourism
he was receiving allowance such as 1000 pounds quarterly as board member
of the Senegambia Hotel and that he was also paid D1000 as GTA board
member. For his overseas travel per diem, Mr. Jallow submitted a list of
the hotels for the trips and the sum involved. But the commission did not
disclose the amount. He further disclosed that he had made a total savings
of D700,000 some part of which was spent on his house and personal family
expenses. He also said he spent D300,000 on his Banjulinding house which
if valued can cost D500,000. Mr. Jallow accepted having a state allocation
only once at the Bijilo Layout but denied having any Agricultural land. He
disclosed that he had and is banking with the Trust Bank and Standard
Chartered Banks; that he does not have any private car, no foreign bank
account and no shares in any business. Towards the close of his evidence
Mr. Jallow also disclosed that he does not hold for himself or for anybody
any gainful business nor did anybody hold brief for him. He denied even
taking part in the implementation of any education project.
The commission finally told the witness that it could be recalled he was
also ordered to supply the commission on the up date of his children’s
educational expenses and bank statements from 1998 to date.


FOCUS ON CEDAW
Continuation

Article 7 - Participation in Public and Political Life
At the grassroots level, the political status and participation of women
is still low.  In the history of The Gambia, there has never been a Female
Divisional Commissioner (Administrative Head).  To date, there is no
Female Chief (Head of an Administrative District), due to the patriarchal
nature of the Gambian society and the traditional belief that only men are
capable of leading.  The implication of this is that the views of women,
who constitute over fifty percent of the national population, are not
heard at the grassroots decision-making level.  At the village level there
are five village heads (Alkalo), this number though few, is indeed a
significant development.  Hitherto it was virtually impossible to have a
female village head, as the eldest male has always been favoured as
opposed to the eldest female.
With regard to economic and employment opportunities there are no express
laws or policies which hinder the access of women to job opportunities.
However, statistics reveal a bias in favour of men, especially in the
Formal Sector.  This is a direct result of the low level of education
among a majority of Gambian women.  The cultural perception, especially
among rural communities, is that a good woman marries and bears children
and therefore has no business with education.  This has resulted in
unequal opportunities in education.
Though policies have been adopted to correct this imbalance women are
still disadvantaged, for example, there were 13,345 employees n the civil
service as at February 1997, but only 21% were females.  According to the
1994 Employment and Remuneration survey, in the formal private sector,
conducted by the Central Statistics Department, less than 32 percent of
the formal private sector employees were females.  The females are
concentrated in the agricultural (5 percent), community, social and
personal services (16 percent) and hotels and restaurants (15 percent) sub
sectors.  Over 75 percent of employees in the formal private agricultural
subsector are females.  This notwithstanding, 83 percent of managerial and
administrative positions are hold by males, 79 percent of uninstalled
employees are females.  Various factors act as stumbling block in the
upward mobility of women on the employment ladder.  Demands of child and
family care, parental and marital obligations are some of the factors that
reduce a woman’s flexibility in pursuing further long-term training.  As a
result, most women lack the relevant qualifications for rising to higher
positions.
However, despite the unfavourable statistics, in recent years the number
of women who have ascended to the higher echelons of management and
executive positions have increased.  There is a number of women who are
heads of institutions and several NGO bodies to name of few.
- The Permanent Secretary Office of the Vice President is a woman;
- The Director General of the Management Development Institute is a
woman;
- The Executive Director Women’s Bureau is a woman;
- The Chief Executive at the Royal Victoria Teaching Hospital and
- The Accountant General

Article 8 - International Representation and Participation of Women
This article seeks to ensure that women are accorded equal opportunity
with men in the area of Diplomacy and International Relation.  It provides
thus: ”State parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure to
women, on equal terms with men without any discrimination, the opportunity
to represent their Governments at the International level and to
participate in the work of international organizations.”
Presently, the participation of women at diplomatic and international
positions is very low.  Out of the twelve ambassadorial positions there is
no female ambassador and only three consulars.  Generally therefore, there
is no discrimination de jure, but de facto women are discriminated upon.
Moreover, due to family commitments married women have found it difficult
to accept diplomatic positions abroad.  In the Gambia it is more common
for a man to travel abroad on diplomatic posting with his wife and family,
than a woman doing the same.  This factor is therefore another obstacle to
the advancement of women in diplomatic and international appointments.

Article 9 - Nationality

This article has two basic ideas.  The first idea is that women, on an
equal footing with men, shall have the right to acquire, change or retain
their nationality, and that marriage or a change in the husband’s
nationality during marriage shall not automatically affect the woman’s
nationality.  The second idea is that women shall have the same rights as
men with regard to the nationality.
The article provides thus:
1. ”States parties shall grant women equal rights with men to
acquire, change or retain their nationality.  They shall ensure in
particular that neither marriage to an alien not change of nationality by
the husband during marriage shall automatically change the nationality of
the wife, render her stateless or force upon her the nationality of the
husband.
2. State parties shall grant women equal rights with men with respect
to the nationality of their children.

Chapter II of the 1970 Republican Constitution of The Gambia, provided for
qualification for citizenship of The Gambia.
According to Section 3 of the 1970 Constitution, Citizenship of The Gambia
could be attained either by birth or descent.  The provisions of the
Section relates to either parent.  Therefore appeared that women have
equal rights with their husbands in relation to the nationality of their
children.  But going by the provisions of Section 6 it is obvious that
this is only available where the child is born in The Gambia.
The Section provides thus:
”A person born outside The Gambia after 17th February 1965 shall become a
citizen of The Gambia at the date of his birth if; at that date, his
father is a citizen of The Gambia.”
The provision meant that the acquisition of citizenship by children born
outside The Gambia was dependent on the nationality of their fathers.
Thus a Gambian woman who has a child born outside The Gambia with a non-
Gambian cannot give her nationality to the child.  This provision was
grossly discriminatory against women.  The only thing that could be done
was to register that child as a citizen of The Gambia under section 4 (1)
of The Nationality and Citizenship Act.  The acquisition of citizenship by
non-Gambian spouses is also discriminatory.  Here the only option
available to a woman who marries a non-Gambian is to adopt the man’s
citizenship, which means that she will be deprived of her citizenship
(Section 10).
However, the corresponding provision in the 1997 Constitution, which is
Chapter III (Citizenship), has made considerable improvement on the status
of women.  In particular Section 10 provides that ”A person born outside
The Gambia after the coming into force of this constitution shall be a
citizen of The Gambia by descent if at the time of his/her birth either
his/her parents is a citizen of The Gambia otherwise than by virtue of
this section or any comparable provision of any earlier constitution.”
The provision is indeed a departure from the provision of Section 6 of the
1970 Constitution, which only accorded, citizenship to a child born
outside The Gambia if that child’s father (and not mother) was a citizen
of The Gambia.  This provision could therefore be considered as a useful
measure in the drive towards according equal rights and privileges to both
men and women.
Section 10 of the 1997 Constitution is indeed an innovation.  It has
accorded women a right, which many had been clamouring for ages.  This
provision is therefore a brilliant example of a good practice vis-Ã -vis
the CEDAW Convention.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~