Thanx camaraLaye for sharing. Could it be that Ousainou and Halifa are indeed saying the same things but in artfully different ways? I kept scratching my head all through the interviews conducted by the Daily News. How can two men of such stature and intellect not come together for commoner purpose??????? The ink is not dry on that prospect yet. And I'll be damned if I should abandon the challenge. There is no fundamental difference in the narration of their stories. The apparent mirages issue from tense, vocabulary, and adjective. Just read over the two interviews. What binds the Plinys is more powerful than what separates them. It will be wicked fate should they remain at gratuitous loggerhead for idle sakes.
Thanx again camaraLaye for sharing. The work has only just begun. Haruna.
-----Original Message-----
From: Momodou Camara <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 4:27 am
Subject: The Daily News: Discourse With Halifa Sallah
Discourse With Halifa Sallah
y Saikou Ceesay
http://www.dailynews.gm/index.php?id=dn_home&tx_wecdiscussion[single]=84706
n this series of interviews, we bring for you an exclusive interview with
alifa Sallah, former flag bearer of the NADD in the 2006 Presidential
lections. It is our objective to bring to light controversies surrounding the
ailure of the Gambian opposition leaders to form a united front capable of
eing a credible alternative to the APRC regime.
We started with Omar Jallow (alias OJ) of the PPP, then Lawyer Darboe of the UDP
ho broke ranks with the alliance in the run up to the 2006 Presidential
lections; and in this edition it is Halifa Sallah, the Coordinator of the
pposition alliance NADD. Below are excerpts of the interview:
Could we say that heads of opposition parties are not committed to the idea of a
nited opposition front in the country?
To form a united opposition cannot be seen as a principle. The principle is to
uild a genuine opposition which could bring about a genuine multiparty system
nd genuine change. The building of a United Opposition is a tactic under
onditions of governance which does not create options for genuine multi party
ontest. For example if the procedure existed for a second round of voting in
he absence of 50 percent majority opposition parties would go on their own to
eek the mandate of the people so that each will know its weight if they wish to
orge an alliance in the second round. In the absence of that a united
pposition was the missed opportunity Gambia needed to bring about a genuine
emocratic environment for multi party contest. In my view those who are
nterested in change would be committed to the tactics but those who are not
ill always put their aspiration to occupy a post above the objectives of
ringing about change to protect and promote the liberty, dignity and prosperity
f the people.
Is it a requirement of the signed MOU that NADD could be registered as a
olitical party?
The agreement is for NADD to put up candidates in the presidential, National
ssembly and Council elections. This is clearly stipulated in article 8 of the
emorandum of understanding. Allow me to quote it in avoidance of doubt. It
tates: “The selection of the candidate of the Alliance for the Presidential,
ational Assembly and Council elections shall be done by consensus: provided
hat in the event of an impasse selection shall be done by holding a primary
lection restricted to party delegates on the basis of equal number of delegates
omprising the chairman, chairwoman and youth leader of each party from each
illage/ward in a constituency. Article 16 states that the Alliance shall have
n emblem, colour, motto and symbol…” There is no doubt that NADD was formed
ith the intention to put up candidates under its umbrella. It is the election
aws which say that NADD could not put up candidates in its name until it was
egistered with the IEC. The election laws did not have any provision on how to
egister an alliance. The IEC had mandate to decide on issues that are not
rovided for by law. The Executive committee decided to prepare for NADD’s
egistration under the existing laws and leave the IEC to decide the final
utcome.
Can we say that the criteria set in the MOU for the registration of candidates
as met only by the UDP?
Selection of Candidate was based on two fundamental principles. It had to be
one either through unanimity or through a Primary. A UDP affiliated person or
ny body could have been selected unanimously. In terms of primary delegates had
o be party chairwomen, chairmen and youth leaders from each ward. The
ontention is that if a primary was held a UDP affiliated person could have been
elected as a candidate. This is now a matter of mere speculation since the UDP
eader opted to resign from NADD instead of calling for a primary.
Do you think national debate is the way forward for the opposition parties as
entioned in Foroyaa’s Friday 23 October editorial?
A country needs a credible Government and a credible opposition. Since the
overnment is afraid of a debate the opposition could start a healthy debate for
he people to learn to listen to divergent views and make in formed decision as
o which group of people should form a government and which group should serve
s major opposition party to monitor and check the activities of government. In
hort, Obama and Clinton did engage in debates but that did not make them
nemies at the end. Debate is the life blood of a democratic society. Without it
multi party system becomes a vegetable.
It is believed that in politics what matters is number, so why political heads
ike your humble self opted for NADD candidacy when UDP leader should be
ominated as suggested by others?
I had no interest in becoming a presidential candidate. I have been with Sidia
or years and he stood as presidential Candidate. I had no interest in being
oordinator. If I had my own free will I would not have accepted to be
oordinator of an alliance. I accepted to be a coordinator because I felt that
uty has called on me to do so. I accepted to be a Presidential candidate
ecause I do not run away from responsibilities when they are unanimously
ntrusted. For your information one must distinguish two phases of NADD’s
rocess of nominating a presidential candidate, that is, the phase before the
DP leader resigned from NADD and the phase after he resigned from NADD. Before
he resignation of the UDP leader he had the option to recommend for the holding
f a primary where numbers would have counted and Halifa Sallah may never have
een part of that contest.
After the resignation of Darboe and the pulling out of UDP and NRP the issue of
umbers did not arise since the committee established to nominate a Presidential
andidate did agree unanimously to select me. Rejecting their nomination was not
responsible option. It is also important to point out that NADD was not
reoccupied with the number of votes a person had in previous elections but was
ormed to ensure that our collective strength could enable an electable
andidate to win. The facts revealed by the results of the 2006 Presidential
lections confirm that numbers do not always add up. In short, in the 1999 -2002
eport of the IEC which was submitted to the National Assembly it is stated that
he UDP leader had 149,448 votes while the NRP leader had 35,671 votes. The
xpectation was that if the two parties formed an alliance in 2006 they will get
n equivalent of their two results in the 2001 Presidential elections which
mounted to185, 119.
When the two parties left NADD and formed their Alliance along with GPDP, the
DP led Alliance managed to get 104,808 and not the 185,119 votes anticipated.
owever when the NADD took part in bye elections before its disintegration, it
ad the upper hand in popular votes. Numbers do count sometimes. However under
iven circumstances it is tactics that bring the numbers. That is how Tumani
ouray became the President of Mali. He met parties with majorities but he was
he electable candidate and won on an Independent ticket. We must find out what
he people want to succeed.
Can you tell us what justifies the registration of NADD after knowing that it
ould lead to the lost of opposition seats in the National Assembly?
I have already said that it was a requirement of the law for a political entity
o be registered with the IEC before it could be put up as a candidate. We
ormed an umbrella Party and had to register it for any body to stand as a
andidate in its name. The constitution has provided for the formation of an
mbrella Party in the form of a merger. In such a case no seat would be lost.
oreover the advantages of establishing NADD outweighed the disadvantages of
osing the seats which could be regained in a bye election which is what
appened.
Can you tell us the main obstacle that led to the failure of the NADD coalition?
ADD was not a homogenous group. It was heterogonous in principle and
spirations. The only thing that could have kept it together is recognition and
dherence to its articles and institutions. The solution was there to handle an
mpasse in selecting a Presidential candidate. This was not put in place. My
onest opinion is that the leaders submitted to a political process they either
id not understand or did not believe in and when it became clear what it
ntailed they abandoned the process.
Why was it a mistake to withdraw your nomination as NADD candidate and later
ome for it?
The UDP leader caused great confusion by making reference to the first attempt
o select a Presidential Candidate without giving an accurate picture of what
appened. He mentioned that in the first instance my nomination was withdrawn
ut introduced later by Sam Sarr on the grounds that the first withdrawal was a
istake. A big debate unfolded among the executive as to what should be done
fter the successful launching of NADD. Some proposed that the launching should
ake place in every division to enable the members of the different parties to
ork together as NADD members. Others felt that we should proceed with the
election of a presidential candidate before popularizing the NADD agenda.
ventually, it was agreed that a date should be agreed to do the selection.
On the day of the selection, a delegate of the NRP and another from NDAM
ominated and seconded the candidature of OJ. The UDP delegate nominated the UDP
eader. Sidia Jatta and Amie Sillah who represented PDOIS nominated and seconded
alifa Sallah’s candidature. I was surprise and requested to speak to Sidia
atta privately. Sidia told me that their proposal was for a criteria to be
rawn for selection and if that fails they should resort to a primary. He
ndicated that the two of them had to make a quick decision to select me so that
hey PDOIS would not be seen to lack a choice since delegates were making
hoices without criteria. We both recalled article 8 which indicated that the
xecutive could only select someone on the basis of unanimity. Otherwise we
hould go to a primary. Since more than one person was already nominated it was
lear that there was an impasse.
Advancing my name was a futile exercise. Sidia therefore withdrew my nomination.
he executive decided to adjourn and meet again to see whether the impasse could
e overcome. At that meeting Sam replaced Amie Sillah. I do not recall him
aying that it was a mistake to withdraw my candidature. You may talk to him for
urther clarification. I remember the arguments he gave regarding the
stablishment of the criteria to guide the selection and the Chairman insisting
hat if he has a nomination to make he should do so. Sam did say that he was
utting Halifa Sallah nomination forward again. I think the action was more a
ign of protest so that the executive will work on some criteria rather than
ust making conflicting nominations which could lead us nowhere. All the
ominations were eventually set aside and a committee was set up to work on a
riteria for selection. This was the outcome of the first debate for selection
f a Presidential Candidate. Up to that point no executive member had proposed
or a primary.
Is it correct that there is insincerity among heads of opposition leaders?
No one has any grounds to accuse any one of insincerity. The Leader of the NDAM
nd the Interim Secretary General of the PPP were part of the UDP Alliance in
001 and things fell apart after the elections. The NRP had even taken over the
lue colour of the PPP when it was banned in 1996. Hence the animosities were
lready there. Each had an interest to pursue. Just like constitutions protect
eople with diverse interest NADD created principles, procedures and
nstitutions which could foster unity been diversity. We contested elections and
on them irrespective of the antagonistic contradictions between some of the
eaders. Each just behaved as expected. Those who felt disappointed are those
ho expected more than what NADD was worth. Neither PDOIS nor my humble self
egrets being part of NADD. We were constantly accused of putting ideological
urity over the need to unite to bring about change in the Gambia.
We sacrificed everything to prove our critics wrong. Now we can move about with
clear conscience. I proposed a party led alliance to be formed six months
efore the 2006 Presidential election which is in line with the Agenda of the
DP but none of the parties endorsed it. We also agreed to hold a primary incase
f an impasse none of the parties proposed to have it. There is need for each to
raw vital lessons and move away from passing moral judgments. As the old saying
oes those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
Could we say that heads of opposition parties are not committed to the idea of
nited opposition in the country?
To form a united opposition cannot be seen as a principle. The principle is to
uild a genuine opposition which could bring about a genuine multiparty system
nd genuine change. The building of a United Opposition is a tactic under
onditions of governance which does not create options for genuine multi party
ontest. For example if the procedure existed for a second round of voting in
he absence of 50 percent majority opposition parties would go on their own to
eek the mandate of the people so that each will know its weight if they wish to
orge an alliance in the second round. In the absence of that a united
pposition was the missed opportunity Gambia needed to bring about a genuine
emocratic environment for multi party contest. In my view those who are
nterested in change would be committed to the tactics but those who are not
ill always put their aspiration to occupy a post above the objectives of
ringing about change to protect and promote the liberty, dignity and prosperity
f the people.
Do you know that Gambians are of the view that the ultimate decision to select
ny Presidential candidate is theirs?
Since I stepped foot on my home land over 30 years ago I have been working to
nsure that the sovereign Gambian people do know that it is their sovereign
ight and authority to determine which person becomes their Presidential
andidate and office holder among other positions of representation. I am sure
any Gambians are fully aware of their sovereign powers to determine their
anner of government and to criticize, scrutinize and restrain their leaders.
nfortunately there are many others who still submit to intimidation, inducement
nd prejudices based on blood ties, place of origin, gender, tribe and other
tatus. Our duty is to open their eyes and all of us will become free and
rosperous. In fact, I am now calling for the Alliance of the people as the
tarting point for ensuring alliance among the political elite. People have
rticised NADD for being a closet agreement which we are now trying to explain
o the people. Agenda 2011 aims to start the debate about unity from the level
f the people. All political forces and parties in the country should explain
hat type of Unity they stand for and how it could be put into effect. The
eople would then be able to determine what is realistic and what is not.
Does the Gambia have a history of self-perpetuating government and if so is APRC
self perpetuating government?
Gambia does have a history of self perpetuating Government. We have never had a
eaceful transfer of executive power. The country has never introduced any term
imit for holding executive power. No effort has been made to decentralize
Power. Executive power has never been restrained by independent and impartial
nstitutions, civil society or an enlightened citizenry. The APRC has
ransformed the constitutional instruments to enable the mandate of district,
illage and regional heads to be determined by the executive. It has eliminated
he second round of voting and introduces patronage at all level of national
ife. Security of tenure is not guaranteed and access to development is
argained for loyalty.
In your candid opinion was the PPP government a self perpetuating government?
The PPP regime started the history of self perpetuating rule. It has not left
ny history of peaceful transfer of executive power either from one person to
nother or one party to another for almost 30 years. It maintained all the
onarchical features in the executive. It could appoint and dismiss ministers
ithout the involvement of parliament. No term limit was placed on the
xecutive. No separation was made between party, president and the state. The
xecutive was above the scrutiny and restraint of Instruments, institutions,
ivil society and an enlightened public. Patronage was the order of the day.
Why would anybody think that if Hamat Bah or Lawyer Darboe is voted in would
ead to a self perpetuating government?
No one should accuse them before they assume the office. What is not helpful is
he UDP leader’s comment that the Gambia does not have a history of self
erpetuating rule. I don’t know why he signed the memorandum of understanding of
ADD which states in article 2 that” The goal of the alliance is to put an end
o self-perpetuating rule, ensure the empowerment of the people so that they can
articipate in sustainable development” NADD promised to put an end to the
istory of self perpetuating rule by limiting the term of the flag bearer to one
o that a level ground would be created for multiparty contest.
In order to achieve your target goal, political parties must address the young
eople’s urgent needs by creating jobs, reducing crime levels and even combating
IDS pandemic that is reportedly claiming many lives globally?
The urgent needs of the young people for employment; the fight against crime and
he HIV/AID pandemic should be the concern of both Governments and opposition.
he Government has a duty to protect the civil, political, economic, social and
ultural rights of the citizenry. The opposition has a duty to make its positive
ontributions while exposing the shortcomings of the government and offering
lternative policies.
Do you think Gambians will listen to you [the opposition] after your falling
part?
The duty of Gambians is not to ignore opposition parties because they have
allen apart but to listen to what they have to say in order to make informed
hoices. This era is the era of the people. The people should no longer rely on
earsay. They must challenge their leaders to engage in debates on all issues of
ational importance. They should not see criticisms and exposures of
hortcomings as negative. They should see those initiatives as mechanisms to
ccess correct information to be able to make informed choices. The people could
nly safeguard their sovereignty if they take ownership of their minds, seek
orrect information in order to make informed choices. The battle for clarity in
he camp of the opposition is not a sign of disarray it is the only way to build
he credible opposition that could engage the APRC and prove to the Gambian
eople that it can provide a better alternative. I am therefore inviting all
ouths of intellect, character, skills and values to join us in this sovereign
ational debate to define the future of this country. In this way each of us
ill become a part of the architects of a destiny of liberty, dignity and
rosperity.
Finally is there any need for opposition parties to come together as a united
ront?
The UDP has made its position very clear. It sees itself as the major opposition
arty and that all other parties should embrace its leader as the flag bearer.
y position is that they should go to the people and promote that form of
lliance.They should not make the mistake of the past by advocating for what
hey do not believe in. I still maintain that NADD served UDP more than any
arty in the Alliance. In short, by the time we sat to form an Alliance UDP had
oycotted the National Assembly elections and had promised never to participate
n elections until its conditions were met. How would UDP have come back into
he electoral process and not lose face, without the opposition front we formed?
t is the opposition coalition which enabled Kemeseng to gain the Jarra seat. He
ost the seat when he went back to the UDP. This should be food for thought. As
ar as I am concerned I am going on to put my proposal to the people. I would
ant a neutral nation builder to emerge, a man or woman who would accept to run
transition government of between 2 to five years and then preside over a free
nd fair elections that would give Gambia a good democratic start, for
overnments to emerge which will only serve for no more than two terms and then
ive way to others to serve. I hope all party leaders would eventually endorse
his and then be among the council of wise men and women who will select the
nly candidate who will stand against President Jammeh.I will keep the media
nformed of my grassroot consultation with the people. This time no party will
tand between me and the people. This is the last but one service I want to do
or the Gambian people, especially the future generation.
Source: The Daily News
ttp://www.dailynews.gm/index.php?id=dn_home&tx_wecdiscussion[single]=84706
****************************
mail: [log in to unmask]
RLs: http://www.gambia.dk
antaba in Cyberspace: Http://www.gambia.dk/forums/
****************************
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
o unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
nterface
t: 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
o 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://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]
|
