Yes, I agree with you 100 %. I also join you in commending the Point
Newspaper for the editorial board's principled stance. The truth must be
told without bias and no matter however painful it is. The people
responsible for these senseless killings should be made accountable for
their horrible deeds.
Bakary J Sonko
-----Original Message-----
From: Modou Sanyang [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 10:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Journalism as we know it?
As we condemn biased reporting, so we must commend journalists who remain
true
to thier calling even under pressure. I am proud of the Point for the
article
below:
cheers,
Modou.
Culled from the Point as published on Quantum web site
The Point Published Saturday, 15 April, 2000
We Want Peace,But...
The statements by Vice President Isatou Njie-Saidy and
Interior Secretary Ousman Badjie called for an analysis.
In the case of the Secretary for the Interior, his
statements over the Radio and the TV are different.
According to the Radio Gambia report, Badjie stated
that the security forces only used rubber bullets and
tear gas. In the interview over the TV, he stated that
they used blanc ammunition, tear gas, batons.
Now, rubber bullets at close range kill, so the use of
rubber bullets could have caused death.
Badjie also said intelligence information revealed that
armed civilians were within the ranks of the
demonstrators. If that was the case, then how many
members of the security forces were shot by these
people? Better still, were any of the armed men identified
or arrested since they were located by intelligence
operatives?
Now, we would not bother to join the speculation on the
suggested identity of such people, which is rampant in
town, for want of proof. But we need to know whether
the intelligence men, that identified them, just stood by
and allowed them to go scot free thereby failing in their
real national security responsibility.
If that was the case, then those are the real threat to
national security, and not the students!
If those people were on the scene and located, they
should have been the primary concern and focus of the
security, and a special group should have been
assigned the role to round them up.
Our sister, the Vice President said the shooting started
from within the demonstrators. In both Badjie's and
Njie-Saidy's accounts, the point made seems to indicate
that these people were firing at the forces. Mrs.
Njie-Sady's account clearly denotes that the shooting
started from their end. The question is - was it because
these people were firing at them, that the security
retaliated using live ammunition in addition to the
rubber bullets?
And were any gunmen hit, as was the case with several
students? Or are we to believe that the gunmen
(apparently enemies of the law, as former detainees, as
said last night on TV and potential enemies of the state
which jailed them) shot at the students while moving
among them, and none of the student attempted to run
away from them?
Or for those shot, were they shot from the back and, if
so, what explains the reported frontal injuries suffered
by the victims.
Is it a case of being between two fires - with the obvious
picture for all to visualise.
It is an open secret that these two statements and
pronoucements did not go down well with the public, as
verified in transport vehicles, public gatherings
(funerals), markets and mosques surroundings.
As we said in our last issue, the failure to avert the
tragedy lies squarely on the shoulders of the
government, and it has to assume full responsibility for
what happened.
Hundreds of onloookers saw who did what. The truth
must be accepted and said. When a young man is
brought to a police station for stealing, his parents bear
the brunt of insults and abuses from the police who
place the responsibility for such a disposition on their
shoulders, although they did not actually commit the
felony themselves (No amalgamation please, a
constitutional right for demonstration is diffferent from
stealing).
The same applies in this case - the government is the
mother and father of the security forces.
If the government, through its agents fails to protect
lives, properties and maintain peace and security at one
point in time, it must be courageous enough to accept
that it is unable to govern; thus it must assume full
responsibility for any situation that arises.
The need for peace and stability must be understood by
government as a sincere effort to address the concerns
and aspirations of the people.
If concerns are not addressed, if issues are not resolved,
and if no apparent moves are made openly to allow
everybody and aggrieved parties to see that the
principles of good governance and the rule of law are
observed, resentment, discord and clashes are bound to
happen.
In order words, it is the government that should lay the
foundation for peace and stability in the first place, by
creating the necessary conducive environment.
On media objectivity, let us tell our sister and her
colleagues that just by associating her in this piece, we
are abiding by the requirement for journalistic
objectivity.
By hinting that a number of people should resign, we
did not exclude our sister nor our brother Badjie:
meaning that the principles of objectivity were
observed. The objectivity of the journalist entails that
he/she distances herself from the people or events
he/she is observing (people here, are people you
normally know and interact with).
And we cannot be accused of not having condemned in
the most vehement terms the destruction of properties.
We re-iterate our call for all responsibilities to be
situated through a credible independent enquiry, for,
that, and only that, could appease the wounded people.
We subscribe to Peace with a capital P, but not to the
"Peace by Force" slogan that some of the security
forces were heard shouting to the boys and girls. For
"peace by force" can only be the best recipe for
disruption of the peace, for conflict and instablity!
Concerning the abuses "stupid, crazy Deyda" and the
death threats, we respond that as documented, in 1994,
when it was "hotter" and more dangerous as early as
September, we offered our life to The Gambia. The
situation is still the same, for as a journalist, we're
obliged to place our responsibility to the people above
and beyond loyalty to anything else. As for the threats:
Yes, a bullet comes with a frightening speed, pierces
your skin, enters and explodes in your body's
horizontal extremity. Small boys and girls endured it,
so why not us? We are no better than them. As for the
fire, it is true that it consumes you in a horrible
manner. But ....you land in Heaven. So what?
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
