Good day to you too.
Mr. Hydara wrote:
"You are right, in the Magazine category, in addition to The Spectator, we
have Tourism Concern and Sheriff Bojang recently published the second
edition of his coloured magazine Xpress".
Mr. Hydara, there is also The patriot and another newspaper that is/was
being edited by Jeggan Grey-Johnson at least some months back. I have not
seen him for a couple of weeks but would provide the name of the paper and
other details when I finally catch up with him.
You also Wrote:
"On Decree 70/71, we recalled that it was Decree 70 that was first conceived
and promulgated. But the government realised that due to some kind of
precipitation, the people it was meant for were completely
forgotten: there was nothing ordering newspapers to re-register. So,
bringing in Decree 71, which clearly did the job, rectified the shot. It
specifically ordered all existing newspapers to re-register and in addition
it multiplied the bond by 100. During the colonial period the bond was
pegged at 100 Pounds; at independence that amount was converted to D1000.
The decree also provides for fines not less than D10, 000 and not more than
D50, 000."
Mr. Hydara, I would have been more comfortable you had reproduced the two
decrees in their entirity. I will however give my understanding of the above
statements as meaning that decree 70 originally required all new newspapers
that were to be established in future to sign a D50,000.00 bond. This was
later ammended by decree 71 to apply to existing newspapers as well.
My understanding of a bond is a writen or spoken agreement guranteeing to
make good such agreement when required to do so. In other words, it is
similar to a bail bond and that none of the papers were actually required to
pay a deposit. It also seems to me that the idea is to ensure that any paper
that is convicted and fined has the ability to pay the fine. Frankly Mr.
Hydara, if that is the case I don't have a problem with that. If I may add
also that the stipulated fines for skin bleaching and the possession of skin
bleaching creams and products seem to be much harsher than the above.
You also wrote:
"And the court empowers by the decree to close down a newspaper in
addition to the fine imposed on it for contravening the provisions of the
principal Act meaning the original Act."
Again I don't have any problem with that. If the original Act says you must
sign a bond of D50,000.00 to enable you pay for any future fines that may
range from D10,000.00 to D50,000., otherwise you cannot register your paper
and if you fail to comply with that order we will take you to court and the
court can fine you any between D10,000.00 to D50,000.00 and also close you
down. That, to me, is very logical and I don't have a problem with that
either.
You also wrote:
"You seem to think my narration strengthened your point. Now one
cannot equate the two situations of the media for the simple reason that THE
FIRST REPUBLIC, AS SEEN IN MY LAST TAKE, FAVOURED THE DUE PROCESS OF THE LAW
IN MOST CASES rather than the harassment, detention etc. etc. we are
accustomed to under the transition and the Second Republic.
I must hasten to add that we would have preferred that we go to
court as it was the case with Halifa Sallah, Sam Sarr and Sidia Jatta for
Foroyaa in 1994 and later with Pap Saine (your father-law?) Alieu Badara
Sowe and Ebrima Ernest for The Point, in 1995.
All the above people won their cases against the state." Emphsis-mine.
Mr. Hydara, whereas you don't seem to think so, but you are actually
strengthening my point! From the above quotation, you have confirmed that:
1) During the first republic, "IN MOST" cases and NOT in all cases, the
media were refered to due process of the law rather than harassment
(Emphsis, mine). You even confirmed this harassment of the media in the
first republic in your earlier post when you listed some of the people who
were picked up on a number of occasions by the defunct NSS and also the
imprisonment of one, Baa trawalleh.
2) You have also told us, from the last paragraph I have quoted above, that
due process of the was followed in the cases of Halifa Sallah, Sam Sarr and
Sidia Jatta for Foroyaa (1994) and Pap Saine, Aliew Badara Sowe and Ebrima
Ernest for The Point (1995). Were these cases not during the second republic
and as such the due process of the law applied in each case?
I rest my case here for now.
Have a very good day, Gassa.
PS. Pap Saine can confirm than I am married to his late brother's daughter,
Sainabou of 42 Glouscester street, for the past 13 years and my last son was
named after him.
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>
To view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>
|
