Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 18/2007, 14-15 February, 2007
Editorial
ADMINISTRATION AND STUDENTS OF THE GAMBIA COLLEGE
No need for controversy!! The new Secretary of State for Education and
research is now faced with his first challenge; that is, how to maintain the
learning, tutorial and social environment which have always existed at The Gambia
College.
Foroyaa maintains that if anyone wants to know whether a university can be
sustained in the Gambia one must look at the way the Gambia College is
preserved.
Foroyaa has been receiving divergent views from the school administration
and the student body on the closure of the college dormitories. Barely a week
after the principal indicated that the college dormitories are closed for this
academic year with the approval of the students, representative of the
Gambia College sub-union had come to report that they are under attack for the
story.
Foroyaa considers it unhealthy for students and administration to be at
logger heads for a matter that they should hold common opinion.
To avoid fraction between students and administration, Foroyaa has decided
to take an editorial position on the subject of the closure of dormitories at
the college.
No Need For Closure of dormitories!!
It is evident that The Government of The Gambia claims to be committed to
the provision of nine years of uninterrupted basic education. The umber of
lower basic schools have increased to 400 and the number of upper basic to 149.
It is claimed that the state department of education has trained 255 students
on Higher Teachers Certificate and 355 students at Primary Teachers
Certificate on a yearly basis. There is absolutely no doubt that the backbone of any
education system are the teachers. One can have the best structures on earth
but without teachers no effective learning will take place. There is claim
everywhere that teachers are abandoning the teaching field because of the lack
of motivation. There is call for a Teachers Service Scheme, increase in
remuneration and provision of teachers’ quarters, to serve as motivation.
What is surprising is the attempt to eradicate campus life for college
students. One of the major complaints of the university students is the lack of a
campus. College students have been protected from the distracting factors of
community life because of the existence of a college campus. Such campus
life promotes peer group educational exchanges, exposure to study facilities and
reduction of expenditure on energy, travel cost and so on.
To negate campus life is to increase the socio-economic burden of the
student and stifle the learning environment.
There is more to gain by maintaining campus life. Infact, what the state
should have done is to increase the staff quarters so that the lecturers will be
part and parcel of campus life. This would have enhanced the environment for
socialization and prepare adequately to shoulder the burden of training up a
new generation. A nation which neglects its teachers negates its future.
The new Secretary of State should establish a committee of enquiry to look
into this matter with speed and solve the problem accordingly.
FONI BINTANG NAM DENIES ALLEGATIONS
The newly elected National Assembly Member for Foni Bintang Karanai, Hon.
Ebrima Solo Jammeh, has denied allegations that he wants to crosscarpet to the
ruling APRC Party. According to claims from some APRC supporters, Hon. Jammeh
(an independent MP) was said to have attended a meeting at the National
Assembly complex after the swearing in ceremony last Thursday and purportedly
delivered a letter indicating his wish to join the APRC. The sources claimed
that when the members were seated, Hon Fatoumata Jahumpa Ceesay, told Hon.
Jammeh that he was not supposed to be part of the meeting, but she was shown a
letter by the elected NAM in which he expressed his intention to crosscarpet to
the APRC. When contacted, Hon. Jammeh said it is true that he went to the
said meeting. According to him, he was asked by the speaker to leave since the
meeting was for APRC NAMs only. He refuted the allegations that he took a
letter there.
However, Hon. Jammeh said that even if he intended to do that, he would
first have to consult with his electorate who will advise him on what to do. He
was however quick to add that even in that case, he has to wait until the dust
is clear. Hon. Jammeh said that there are a lot of things that need to be
done before he could do or say any thing like that.
GAMBIA NEEDS DEBT RELIEF TO MEET MDGs
(NATIONAL DEBT STRATEGY WORKSHOP)
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
The Gambia is considered to be a Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC). The
boards of the World Bank and IMF have established standards to enable a country
to reach completion point based on the criteria set to achieve debt relief.
All countries which are heavily indebted and poor need debt strategy. This is
why SoS Musa Gibril Bala Gaye, Secretary of State for Finance and Economic
Affairs, stated that “The country has just commenced implementing faithfully
the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) so as to reach completion
point under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC) with its
associated debt relief.”
Mr. Gaye was speaking on Monday 12th February at a 10 day workshop on
National Debt and New Financing Strategy Analysis Workshop, held at the Paradise
Suite Hotel which was jointly organised by the West African Institute for
Financial and Economic Management (WAIFEM) and Debt Relief International (DRI).
SoS Gaye said, among other things, that before Gambia reached decision point
under the Enhance HIPC initiative in year 2000, a debt sustainability
analysis was conducted for the country in May 2000 in conjunction with the IMF and
World Bank.
He indicated that the Debt Sustainability analysis revealed that “total
external public debt stock stood at $452 million in nominal terms; that is over
12 billion dalasis in 2000. He added that the ratio of debt to GDP, debt to
export and debt to revenue were 59%, 217%, 332%, respectively. He added that
debt service payment in 1999 was 19.9 million dollars or 16% of export
earnings.
SoS Gaye expressed that Gambia’s main creditors were the multilaterals
accounting for 70 percent of debt, of which 32% was owed to IDA (World Bank,) 22
percent to the AFDB (African Development Bank) and 3 percent to the IMF.
Bilateral creditors accounted for the remaining 30 percent, of which one third was
due to Paris Club and two thirds to non-Paris club creditors.
According to SoS Gaye, the findings from the Debt Sustainability Analysis
motivated the Boards of the International Development Association (IDA) and the
IMF to approve decision point status for the Gambia meaning that it could
benefit from a debt relief package amounting to US$66.6 million or 1832 million
dalasis. The package included an interim relief in the form of debt service
reduction by IDA, IMF and the African Development Bank.
The Secretary of State indicated that the Gambia was supposed to reach
completion point by 2002.
However the Gambia failed to do so because of what he termed as “slippages
arising from a combination of exogenous stocks, fiscal out turns and
accommodating monetary policy which impeded the implementation of the PRGF (Poverty
Reduction Growth Facility). SoS Gaye promised that after implementing a staff
monitored programme, (a conditionality imposed by the IMF), between October
2005 to March 2006 the way has been paved for the restoration of PRGF from
January 2007. He promised that they will attain the completion point established
by the IMF by mid year. He expressed his conviction that “The attainment of
completion point will enable the Gambia to obtain the debt relief it was
promised at decision point and the relief from the Multilateral Debt Relief
Initiative (MDRI), including the UK Initiative.
SoS Gaye informed the workshop that the debt stock was 5.5 billion dalasis
in 2000 that it rose to 10.8 billion dalasis in 2002, 17.2 billion dalasis in
2004 and 18 billion dalasis in 2005.
The Secretary of State indicated that between 1999 and 2005, the external
debt grow by 36%. It added that “The growth reflected largely new
disbursements, estimated at about 217 million dollars (6.06 billion dalasis) from the
multilateral agencies, World Bank, African Development Bank, the Islamic
Development and other bilaterals such as the Kuwaiti fund and Republic of Taiwan –
China.
The Secretary of State concluded that “The Gambia is a low income country
with heavy need for continuous borrowing in order to meet the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) which is a great challenge. In this connection, it could
leverage the recently launched World Bank/IMF debt sustainability framework
for Low Income Countries (DSF for LICs) assessment. The assessment for The
Gambia bears eloquent testimony for the imperative of debt relief. Results
indicate that, with the full delivery of both HIPC and MDRI relief, The Gambia is
deemed to be in debt stress. Against the indicative thresholds of 30% for NPV
of debt-to-GDP in 2005, The Gambia recorded 83.5%; with regard to export
criteria with indicative threshold of 100%, The recorded 312.3%. in that same
year, the debt service ratio hit 21.1% compared with the indicative threshold of
15%.”
The workshop is to consider the fact he gave in their analysis.
COUNCILLOR APPEARS
IN PA SALLAH JENG’S TRIAL
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
Marie Dalliah, Councillor for Banjul Central Ward, has continued her
testimony on Tuesday in the criminal trial involving Pa Sallah Jeng, Mayor of Banjul.
Dalliah told the court that sometimes in 2004, about six or eight public
toilets situated at Primet, Albion and Fitzgerald streets junction were
demolished. She said the report of the demolition was not brought before the
council. Dalliah said after noticing the demolition, she contacted the mayor and
asked him why it was done. She narrated that the mayor told her that they are
developing the place. She said that she later learnt that a store was being
constructed at the site, noting the store has another toilet. She also said she
saw two toilets outside the building.
Dalliah also said that she wrote a letter to the Department of Lands after
which a commission was set up to look into the matter. She noted that it was
at the said commission that she saw a copy of the plan of the building and
part of the documents pertaining to the construction. Dalliah testified that
there was no tendering for the contract and that she did not know why the place
was leased for twenty years. She told the court that the daily collection of
refuse, street lights and the overseeing of parks are some of the services
that the council provide. She also said that there was a time when the council
was in arrears of electricity payments and was using two generators. One of
the generators according to her was in the Mayor’s office and the other in
the Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) office. She could not tell the court the
capacity of the generators and does not also know whether the decision to buy
them was taken by council. She said she understood that one of the generators
was purchased by council and that the two machines were used for more than
five months.
On the purchase of compactors, towing ambulance, a book ‘In my time’ and
the construction of the store, she said the contracts were awarded without
council’s approval.
Under cross-examination, Dalliah said the CEO is not answerable to the
mayor, but council. She also said that she does not work in any department of the
council and therefore would not know anything there if she does not find out.
The case continues on 19th March for cross-examination.
OCEAN BAY HOTEL
A SEPARATE INSTITUTION OR A SUBSIDIARY OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND HOUSING
FINANCE CORPORATION?
By Sarjo Camara Singhateh
Ocean Bay Hotel and Resort is said to have been bought for 45 million dalasi
by the Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation. It is reported that
up to D300 million dalasi was spent to refurbish it. What the contributors to
the Social Security fund have been asking is whether the company is making
profit and how much the members are receiving as sitting allowances.
Foroyaa therefore approached the Managing Director of the Social Security
and Housing Finance Corporation, the Chairman of the Board, Amadou Samba and
the General manager of Ocean Bay Hotel and Resort Mr. Lucien Gibisa for
clarification. As we go to press none of these officers would clarify the issues.
Editor’s Note
It is important for the Ocean Bay Board and the Managing Director of the
Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation to explain how much Ocean Bay is
paying to Social Security to offset its investment of D345 million. This
should go hand in hand with limiting board privileges pending the offsetting of
the investments. The boards of public enterprises should also appoint public
relations officers who should answer to public concerns. Refusal to give
interviews to journalists do not dispel rumours. It only goes to spread them. We
hope the officials concerned would listen to what is being spread against
their institutions and clarify issues to dispel the rumours. What the reporters
told them is exactly what is being scandalised.
MAN ARRAIGNED FOR TRESPASS AT BANJUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
By Modou Jonga
A Gambian national, Omar Tamba, was on Monday 12th February, 2007 arraigned
and charged with trespass at the Banjul International Airport.
The case was before Magistrate E.F M’bai at the Brikama Magistrates’ Court.
The man was alleged to have committed trespass on 2nd February, 2007 being
an act which violates section 34(1) of the Aviation act. Omar Tamba pleaded
guilty to the said offence.
In narrating the facts, the prosecutor said in the night of the said date
the accused had managed to gain access to the departure Hall at the Airport;
that at the said hall he sat and waited for the bus along side other
passengers; that upon the arrival of the bus, the accused entered it together with
other passengers and were transported to the aircraft.
The accused again, with passengers, climbed the stairs of the plane and was
thus spotted by one Ebrima N.S Ceesay, an Aviation Security Guard.
According to the prosecutor, it was then that the Aviation Security Guard
immediately suspected that the accused was not a valid travelling passenger. He
said that the accused was then approached inside the flight and questioned
about his documents by the said Aviation Security officer; that this
confrontation thus revealed that the accused was without documents and as such was
brought down the flight with the help of two Aviation Security officers.
The prosecutor narrated that after being brought down, the accused was taken
to the Aviation Security Station where he was further interrogated and was
later transferred to the Police station at The Airport; that at the said
Police Station the accused was again questioned as to whether he (the accused) has
any travelling documents and to which he responded in the negative; that he
was subsequently charged for the said offence for which he is now standing
trial.
Following his plea of guilt to the offence he was convicted by the
Magistrate and fined D200 or in default to serve three months imprisonment.
COURT ISSUES BENCH WARRANTS FOR REPATRIATED MIGRANTS
By Modou Jonga
The Brikama Magistrate Court on Monday, 12th February 2007, issued a bench
warrant for the arrest of twenty-five repatriated migrants from Spain.
This is the second time for such issuance of bench warrants in this
particular case by the said court, presided over by Magistrate E.F M’bai. The first
was on the 12th December last year and it involved twelve repatriated migrants.
The twenty-five accused persons to be arrested are part of a group of thirty
accused persons standing trial at the said court for alleged malicious
damage to the property of The Gambia Civil Aviation Authority at the Banjul
International Airport on 28th October 2006. All the accused persons, most of whom
are in their mid-twenties, have pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred
against them. Five of the accused persons were, however, present in court.
KOMBO EAST UDP CANDIDATE AND CO. TRIAL ADJOURNED
By Modou Jonga
The trial involving the state and Lamin R. Darboe and four other supporters
of the United Democratic Party (UDP) was on Monday 12th February, 2007
adjourned due to the absence of the presiding magistrate, S.B Tabally. The case
started after the by-election held in Kombo East, in 2006
All the accused persons, Lamin R. Darboe (the UDP Kombo East candidate in
the just concluded National Assembly Elections), Jerreh Fatty, Baba Darboe,
Maimuna Jabarteh and Momodou Demba were present in court.
Arraigned on the 7th August 2006 before the said magistrate, the accused who
pleaded not guilty are charged with unlawful assault, thereby causing their
complainants bodily harm.
The alleged assaults are said to have been committed on May 15th 2006 at
Pirang Village, in the aftermath of the said by-elections last year. The case is
adjourned to Monday 26th February, 2007.
BAKAU UDP CANDIDATE’S TRIAL AGAIN ADJOURNED
By Modou Jonga
The trial involving the state and the UDP candidate for the Bakau
constituency in the just ended National Assembly elections, Mr. Nfamara S. Bojang, was
on Monday 12th February adjourned to Monday 26th February.
The case, presided over by Magistrate E.F M’bai, was adjourned due to the
absence of the prosecutor who was said to be on an official mission. Prosecutor
413 Sanyang held brief for the latter.
In the previous sitting, the prosecutor, ASP Badjie, has told the court that
the two witnesses available in this case are Police Officers whom he said
were on examination and as such could not attend court to testify.
Mr. Bojang who pleaded not guilty to the two criminal charges, was arrested
a day after his nomination by the I.E.C to contest the Bakau Constituency
seat and was thus subsequently arraigned in court on 10th January 2007 at the
Brikama Magistrates’ Court. Defence counsel, lawyer Ousainou Darboe, was
present in court.
FOCUS ON THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN THE GAMBIA
GAMBIA BEFORE COLONIAL RULE
How Was Gambia Like Before Colonial Rule?
By Suwaibou Touray
The Gambia was not a single geographical or political entity before colonial
rule. The area that we called Gambia today was patched up between different
kingdoms inhabited by different tribes, who were each considered sovereign.
That means, each state or empire considered itself as a separate entity. These
kings sometime have treaties or understanding but also misunderstandings,
and wars raged on. Some of these kings at the time do pay tax to bigger empires
like Mali. Up to 1807, many of these kingdoms existed, namely; Jarra, Kiang,
Niani, Nuimi, Fuladu, Wulli, Europina, Kombo, Kantora etc.
During this period, 1800s, many Jihadist emerged in the Gambia who refused
to recognize the traditional kings and waged war against them. Many kings were
removed.
History also teaches us that about 1807, British subjects left their country
to established settlements in the Gambia and other places. They did not
initially use force at the time to establish these settlements. Instead they
asked permission from the kings to settle on their territories. Through that,
they signed treaties granting them permission to settle on their lands, but
these settlers also in turn paid customs duties and other taxes to the kings.
For example, St. Mary’s Island, Marcarthy Island, etc are some of the
settlements before 1894.
Later on, attempts were made to introduce the sovereignty of the British
Monarch through out the area we called the Gambia today.
HOW DID THE BRITISH SUCCEED TO COLONIZE THE GAMBIA?
According to the records, between 1850 and 1901,the jihadists who never
wanted to be under the rule of kings whom they considered to be unbelievers,
rebelled and waged war on them thereby uprooting a lot of them.
According to historical records, the British settlements were untouched. The
Administrators of the settlements therefore developed a military tactic of
giving support to kings who were threatened by Jihadist invasion in order to
defeat the invaders. Accordingly, they provided arms and ammunitions to assist
the weaker kings to resist the invaders. Once they become successful, the
administrators considered those kings to be under their protection. Hence the
concept “Protectorate” which originated from this collaboration between the
British settlers and the kings who were threatened by the jihadists or stronger
kings.
According to historical records, by 1894, the settlers introduced a
protectorate ordinance which will pave the way to control all the socalled areas
under their protection. The ordinance provided for the division of the
territories into administrative divisions administered by commissioners, districts
administered by head Chiefs and villages administered by Alkalos (head men). They
made laws for the chiefs and village heads to abide by the orders of the
commissioners. They also made laws for the Governor to vary the boundaries and
appoint all the divisional and district administrators as they wished. They
then established what they called Native Courts whose members were appointed by
the Governor.
This law, the protectorate ordinance, has sparked new resistance between
1894 and 1901. Many wars against the British settlements broke out. But because
of the fact that many traditional rulers were already replaced by new people
appointed by the British, who had anyway accepted to collaborate with them,
there were thus little pockets of resistance to colonial domination.
However, the defeat of Fode Sillah of Kombo and the defeat of Fode Kaba
Dumbuya in 1901 and the acceptance of Musa Molloh to be under the protectorate
ordinance led to the implementation of the protectorate ordinance in 1894.
Therefore by 1902, the protectorate ordinance 1902 came into force. It was
at this stage that all the inhabitants of The Gambia fell under the complete
control of the British crown. The urban settlements were considered the colony
and the rest of the country was considered the protectorate.
As it can be clearly stated that the 1902 protectorate ordinance marked the
beginning of the effective control of our country by the British Colonialists.
WHAT COLONIAL RULE MEANT FOR GAMBIANS
It means that power is vested in the Governor who can divide the country
into divisions, appoint commissioners to administer them, divide divisions into
districts and appoint head chiefs to administer them and districts into
villages and empower chiefs to appoint village headmen. This, then, means that
once a commissioner issued orders, the head chiefs of districts and the headmen
of villages must follow those orders.
Colonial rule also means that it is the foreigners who are in control, power
is vested in them, they make the laws and through that they create two types
of justice system for the same country. They established (Native Tribunals)
for those in the provinces/protectorates and also established magistrates’
courts, high court etc in the urban areas/colony, meant for the socalled
civilized subjects. So this, in essence, had created two standards of justice. It
has created tyranny in the protectorates where chiefs ruled by customs and
orders from the commissioners even to the extent of banishing or expelling those
people deemed to be dissidents from the country. Nobody dares to raise one’s
voice above a chief’s voice not to talk of a commissioner. Chiefs could
threaten herdsmen of banishment from their districts. They were more or less
ruling as the traditional kings before them who ruled by pronouncements. No one
dared to disobey the order of a chief or commissioner. A chief could send his
chief’s police to any cattle herdsman and ask for a bull for his lunch and no
herdsman dared to disobey such requests for fear of banishment.
This is what colonialism meant: Injustice and tyranny, not democracy, not
rule of law. Laws were just meant to be smokescreens. The Governors were to
have Executive and Legislative Councils to advice them. For example, at a given
stage, the governor, the colonial Secretary and collector of customs
constituted the Executive Council. These all goes to show that the Executive and
Legislative Councils were not democratic institutions because the governor and
his advisers were not elected by the people, and did not govern according to
the consent of The Gambian people.
From 1902 to 1965, Gambians do not determine the manner of Government in
their country nor do they decide who should govern them. For over 63 years an
undemocratic government which is not accountable to Gambians in any way was
imposed on the people. So the question is, how did the colonial regime survived
for this period.
Needless to say, how did the colonial government relied on the people to
derive revenue. They imposed yard, cattle and other direct taxes on the people.
They imposed import and export duties on goods. Those who paid import duties
added them to the prices of the sugar and other goods they sold to the
people. Those who paid export duties subtracted the sum from the prices of the
groundnuts and other goods they bought from the people.
The revenue collected from the people did not go to promote social services.
For example, the revenue collected from the people rose from £46,640 in 1908
to £96,221 in 1912. It rose to £268,788 in 1902. however, in 1912, out of
£96,221, £1000 was spent on education.
It is also important to point out that despite the limited funds collected,
the lack of provision of social services enabled the colonial administrators
maintain a budget surplus which amounted to £107,731 in 1912 and £328,677 in
1920.
The farmers who produced groundnuts earned very little. The employees of the
colonial administration and the trading enterprises received very low
incomes.
For example, the production of groundnuts rose from 18,000 tonnes in 1890 to
96,000 tonnes in 1915, the price of groundnuts was £4 per tonne. The Gambian
farmers earned less than 4 pounds sterling a year. Workers at different
periods earned less than 1 pound sterling a month. Up to the 1930s, civil
servants received between £1.10s and £2 per month.
Hence, there was taxation without adequate provision of public services.
There was taxation without representation. The tax payer had no means of
replacing the Governor through periodic elections. The farmers and workers had no
freedom of assembly or association to express grievances.
FEATURE
The NEA and The People - Putting First Things First
By Demba Jawo
Most people are hearing with anxiety the plans by the National Environment
Agency (NEA) to introduce legislation making it an offence to litter the
streets or public places, no doubt to give a boost to President Jammeh’s ‘
Operation Clean the Nation’. Of course cleanliness is the ideal situation any
society would aim for, but is it really attainable in the present situation this
country finds itself? The answer is of course a big ‘No’, not as long as the
most basic sanitary facilities such as toilets and even litter bins are absent
in our public places.
While it should be the objective of every Gambian to see our country as
clean as any other country in the world, but, it certainly takes much more than a
piece of legislation to achieve such an ambition. While there is no doubt
for instance, that President Jammeh’s ‘Operation Clean the Nation’ is a noble
objective, but again, it falls far short of what is required to achieve a
clean environment in The Gambia unless certain things are put in their proper
perspective.
We all know that the municipalities and area councils do not have the
capacity to even collect the domestic waste being generated daily in their areas or
even take care of their most basic duties, let alone take on additional
responsibilities. Therefore, it makes little environmental sense for the people
to be compelled to clean their areas every so often while they are given no
means of disposing off the garbage.
We have therefore seen that despite all the noise being made about ‘
Operation Clean the Nation’, the impact on the environment is hardly noticeable. Our
towns and villages are getting filthier than ever before. Apart from the lack
of basic facilities to dispose off the garbage, it is also mainly because ‘
Operation Clean the Nation’ has been seen by many people as an imposition by
President Jammeh rather than a genuine voluntary undertaking by the people.
This is no doubt why fewer and fewer people are taking part in it. While
President Jammeh and those who carry out his orders have succeeded in restricting
the free movements of the people for virtually the whole day every time the
exercise is on, but a majority of the people would instead choose to stay at
home until when the “curfew” is lifted than take part in the exercise. Of
course it is not that they are not interested in cleanliness of the environment,
but because they detest the element of compulsion involved in it.
Indeed, the exercise seems to be causing more harm than good to this country’
s economy because every time it is on, economic activities are brought to a
complete halt. We can imagine how many millions of Dalasi are lost to the
economy, particularly the private sector such as the banks and other commercial
concerns every time there is a cleaning exercise. This is certainly a big
disincentive to investors who consider every minute as important. Therefore, if
investors are forced every so often to close down their businesses for a whole
day in order to clean their environment, then it would not be surprising if
many of them decide to relocate to other countries where they would be free
to operate their businesses without any undue interference. It certainly does
not make much economic sense to invite investors while at the same time,
subject the private sector to so much executive interference in their daily
activities, including the numerous unnecessary public holidays.
This is in addition to the hardship that ‘Operation Clean the Nation’ also
causes to ordinary Gambians who have other important businesses to transact,
particularly when taxis and commercial vehicles are not allowed to operate
within the period of the exercise. It is indeed hard to see the rationale of
preventing the ordinary people from their only means of transportation while
those at the top continue to use government vehicles to transact their
businesses and those of their families.
Going back to the NEA proposals to enact an anti-littering legislation, one
would wonder how it can be enforced when there are hardly any litter bins in
public places where people can drop their litter. It also does not make any
sense for instance, to make a law in this country which forbids people from
urinating in the streets and other public places when there are no public
toilets in any of our towns and villages.
We can all recall that in the past, there used to be at least some public
toilets in various parts of Banjul, but that is hardly the case nowadays,
despite all the noise being made about ‘Operation Clean the Nation’. It is
amazing that despite the dramatic increase in the population of our urban centres,
the authorities have still not seen the urgent need to provide such basic
sanitary facilities. It therefore makes no sense for the NEA to expect people
not to urinate and even defecate in the streets, because it is a natural
phenomenon which cannot be avoided.
Therefore, if indeed the NEA are really serious about enacting and enforcing
such legislation, then they should first ensure that such basic facilities
are available and the municipalities and area councils are given the ability
to collect and dispose off the garbage in their areas. Otherwise, the
enactment of such legislation would be a waste of time and energy as it would never
be enforced, even though a few unfortunate people will be molested over it.
DETENTION WITHOUT ACCESS PERSIST
By Modou Jonga
A source close to the family of Sergeant Buba Jammeh has revealed to Foroyaa
that their access to the detained loved one is being denied.
Sergeant Jammeh of the Sate Guard has been in detention for over seven
Months now. He was arrested, at his work place in June last year, in the wake of
the Freedom Newspaper scandal.
Family sources alleged that they were denied access to Sergeant Jammeh by
authorities at the Central Prison (mile 2). They alleged that Sergeant Jammeh
was on November 2006 transferred from his detention cell at the NIA
headquarters to the Central Prison without their knowledge.
Sources disclosed that the prison authorities have indicated to them that
they are instructed to disallow people to have access to Sergeant Jammeh.
This denial of access, said the sources, and the continue detention of their
breadwinner have caused serious psychological strain and difficulties not
only to his four children but also the entire family.
While being concerned with the health condition of Sergeant, a family member
expressed doubt about their relative being an informant of the said
newspaper.
The source told this reporter that Sergeant Jammeh was never arraigned
before any court of law
UDP CANDIDATE AND OTHERS RELEASED
Suku Singhateh, the National Assembly Member for Lower Baddibou has informed
this paper that his opponent in the recent National Assembly Election, Kebba
F Singhateh and others have been released by the authorities.
He said all the charges against Singhateh and the other arrestees were
dropped. Suku had earlier informed this paper that Kebba Singhateh is his brother
and that they are from the same compound. According to him, the brawl that
precipitated the arrest of Singhateh and others was unfortunate.
ALFUSAINEY JAMMEH STILL DETAINED
Mr. Alfusainey Jammeh, a prison officer and a native of Kanilai, was
arrested in October 2004 at Kanilai where he was posted. He has since been detained
at the central prison for more than two years.
According to his family members, they have not been in contact with him
since his arrest. They said they were told that Alfusainey is being detained. The
family members said their loved one was arrested by soldiers and police at
Kanilai who took him to Banjul where they last saw him. They called on the
authorities to release their loved one or take him to court.
UDP SUPPORTER DISCHARGED
By Modou Jonga
Foday Bah, a supporter of the United Democratic Party (UDP) was on Monday
12th February, 2007 discharged by Magistrate E.F M’bai due to the inability of
the prosecution to proceed with the case.
A resident of Sinchu Alagi, Foday Bah was standing trial at the Brikama
Magistrate Court for allegedly violating the Elections Decree during the campaign
period ahead of the presidential election. He had pleaded not guilty to the
charge preferred against him.
Our readers could recall that Mr. Foday Bah was granted bail by the Banjul
High Court on the 17th October 2006. However, he was not released on bail
contrary to the court order.
According to the prosecutor, 413 Sanyang, the file of the said case is yet
to be received from the Attorney General’s Chambers and as such would apply
for the case to be adjourned sine-die. However, the application for adjournment
was thus refused by the presiding Magistrate. The said file at the Attorney
General’s Chambers for legal advice had caused the dragging of the case from
proceeding in three court sittings.
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]
|
