Extreme Errors The Independent (Banjul) COLUMN June 29, 2001 Posted to the web June 29, 2001 A Patriot And Democrat Banjul, the Gambia In the recent past, President Jammeh seemed to have disagreed with the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) in the demarcation of constituency boundaries without going to the people. He was quoted, as saying that he will dissolve the IEC after the elections, (The Point Friday June 1, 2001). He has said that the IEC has no mandate to enact laws. Therefore he said his government would not accept any individual or institutions that are out to sabotage their development efforts. He made those remarks whilst addressing a meeting with the committee of elders from Banjul on Wednesday 30th May. He advised the elders to preach the message of peace, discipline, tolerance and development in their communities. Secretaries of State Ousman Badjie and Nai Ceesay also told the delegation that Banjul will still retain its three constituencies and urged the people of Banjul to register for the forthcoming general elections. In another development, the IEC is said to be holding talks with the country's political parties over which method of vote counting to implement when voting ends on Election Day. With the exception of PDOIS which still boycotts IEC meetings following the sacking of Bishop Solomon Tilewa Johnson at the end of last year, all political parties, APRC, UDP, NRP and GDP are said to be taking part in the discussions that may determine whether the counting of votes should take place at polling stations immediately after the casting of votes. Communiqués from the parties addressed to the administrative secretary of the IEC have subscribed to the counting of votes at various polling stations immediately after the closure of voting. The parties expressed the belief that this measure would be fairer, transparent and less expensive in terms of logistics to conduct the elections. They also observed with a certain degree of apprehension that the transportation of ballot boxes from remote areas to divisional headquarters by security agents who have been known to be partisan in favour of the ruling party. They added that during the 1996 elections, some party agents witnessed what they called ballot fixing while others were intimidated, harassed and even beaten by security personnel, and based on that experience, the opposition believe that a considerable part of the electorate are reluctant to exercise their voting rights, believing that vote-rigging through force will mar voting day. Meanwhile the APRC has expressed reservations over the suggestions of counting votes at polling stations immediately after the polls close. The ruling APRC has refused so far to accept the method suggested by the opposition. According to a letter from the party dated 12th June and signed by the deputy administrative secretary Kebba Kinteh the APRC leadership demanded to know the rationale behind what he called the abrupt departure from the traditional method of counting which it argued has proven to be hitch-free, transparent and of less security risk. The APRC is of the opinion that the IEC should liase with the government particularly the security forces and not political parties if an informed decision on the matter is to be taken (The Independent page 1 and 2, 15 - 17 June 2001). My first advice is to PDOIS a party I do not belong to but whose principle I respect. Their enlightening of the electorates, particularly the booklets they wrote on the Constitution during the stormy weather of the transition to democratic rule is commendable. Can PDOIS not see from the references of The Point and The Independent quoted above the reasons for sacking Bishop Johnson or do they want APRC or the court to tell them? In my view, all parties should compromise their principles in the interest of the country just to give a new lease of life to politics in this country. Otherwise, it will be like sacrificing the country for PDOIS' principles. Please blend your energies and experiences for the good of the country. As for UDP, please forget about pursuing Mahawa Cham's victory in court and work for the coming together of the many heads of the opposition parties to rescue this country from the clutches of the APRC. The only party that the APRC often accuse of sowing seeds of discord and tribalism is the UDP. Well all those on the side of God and the truth who are concerned with the proper development of The Gambia know why. It is because the party carries a lot of support as evidenced by the 1996 presidential election results which appeared after the declaration of the results by the PIEC, in a foreign newspaper. From then to now, the UDP is APRC's headache and will remain so as long as the political complexion of The Gambia remains the same. As for the APRC, the party has a problem without seeing it, much more is to listen, even to opposing views which are progressive and for the good of the country. I must admit, I supported the AFPRC takeover from the 25th July, 1994 after I read the interview with the then Lieutenant Yahya Jammeh by Rodney D. Sieh of the Daily Observer, who was also the BBC correspondent in Banjul, together with an earlier one by Momodou Musa Secka, also of the Daily Observer, at State House on Friday 22nd July, 1994 (see Daily Observer Monday 25th July, 1994, page 8 and 9) under the heading of "Why we took over". Parts of the interview, which influenced my support, were as follows: - Daily Observer: How soon should we expect a new government to be named? Lt. Y.J: A new government will be named as soon as possible. We are not naming a government now, because we need the support of the civilians, intellectuals and patriotic Gambians who are clean, who will make sure that they serve in their appointments without fear or favour and for the good of every Gambian. D.O: What are your plans for the establishment of democracy, which was one of your main objectives for taking over? Lt. Y.J: Well, as soon as a new government is instituted, which is composed of mostly civilians, democracy would be in place and we will welcome all contributions from all corners of the country to make sure that everything is done in the right way and that transparency and accountability will be the order of the day. We will not tolerate any sort of corruption; we will not be secretive in anything that we do. We want the press and the international community, including Gambians, to criticise us where we go wrong. We are not here for praises; we are not here to enrich ourselves. We are here to set up a just system that is not corruptible, to make sure that the living standards of Gambians will be augmented to an acceptable standard within the limits of our resources. But we are not here to use the limited resources of the country for our own good at the detriment of the masses. D.O: Will you make any effort to question them about the whereabouts of government funds? Lt. Y.J: Well, it is up to them to come back as Gambians and account for whatever they have to account for. But as for the president, we all know that we owe it to him that the name of The Gambia has reached that international level and we respect him. But the people who were behind him misled him. They were corrupt, did whatever they wanted to do because he was too lenient. We have no intention of harming him - the former president - or humiliating him. We want to treat him as an elderly man. He is free to come to the country as a Gambian citizen and we can provide for his security if he needs it, and from time to time we will need to consult him. We will not sideline him; we will consult him for advice. We have nothing against him, but the people behind were doing whatever they wanted, uncontrolled. D.O: So how soon, then, can the ordinary Gambian say, "I am looking forward to free and fair elections", what timetable can you give. Lt. Y.J: Well, we are not giving any timetable for free and fair elections. That does not mean that we are here to stay long; we are not here for that. D.O. How long, then? Lt. Y.J: I cannot give you a fixed timetable because we have to a make sure that Gambians are aware of what their rights are, what kind of leader they want and what type of system they want to put into effect in this country, that's all. And we also want to make sure that the term of the presidency in this country is limited. We don't want life presidency, a president who will rule for decades. So from that you will know that we are just transitional. D.O: So what term are you suggesting for the presidency in The Gambia. Lt. Y.J: Well that will be up to the Gambian people. I cannot decide for the people. I am no here to dictate what should happen to Gambians. We will organise a national electoral commission and a referendum as well to ask the people of The Gambia what kind of leaders they want and the term of office they want that leadership to serve. Certainly it will not be a term that will exceed ten years. In fact, ten years is too much for a third world country like The Gambia, so we will make sure that there's a democratic system of government, that will be elected by the people and can be kicked out by the people if they don't want it, peacefully, and through the ballot box, and that's all we want (Daily Observer, Monday 25th July, 1994 page 8 and 9). A delegation of the AFPRC led by Chairman Jammeh visited Senegal and at the end of that visit, he was quoted as telling the press that the AFPRC will hand over to civilians after four years. On his return he was quoted as telling the press that what he told the Senegalese press was that AFPRC will rule for years before handing over to civilians. However, when the AFPRC presented their timetable for democratic constitutional rule in the presence of a large crowd including the diplomatic community, on Monday 24th October 1994 at the Independence Stadium, it stretched from November 1994 to December 1998, a period of four and a half years. What a beautiful coincidence with the Senegalese press's wonderful guess was my reaction; what was yours Mr. reader or did you not hear it? Indeed that timetable gave rise to reactions of all types at home and abroad. This necessitated the setting up of a National Consultative Committee, which submitted its report in January 1995. The AFPRC yielded to the wishes of the majority of Gambians to arrange to return the country to democratic rule in two years with effect from 22nd July 1994. I withdrew my support for the AFPRC when the draft constitution was released because I was sure that the four-man Council was out to take Gambians for a ride and they had an agenda to rule for more than a decade as opposed to the Chairman's promise in his interview with Rodney D. Sieh that ten years was too much for a third world country like The Gambia. A committee set up by the council, the Constitutional Review Commission, after a countrywide consultation, recommended two terms of five years. The draft of the constitution did not do this at the discretion of the four-man council. Gabriel Roberts, the then Chairman of the Provisional Independent Electoral Commission confirmed this in an exclusive interview with the Daily Observer by stating that "a great majority of Gambians had recommended that the term of the president should be limited to two terms of five years each which, he continued, was contained in the report submitted to the council" (for full story see Daily Observer May 17 - 19, 1996 page 1 and 14). In fact, Gambians should question why at the tail end of their term in office the APRC should embark on so many constitutional amendments but still ignoring the wishes of the majority of Gambians to limit the presidential term to two terms of five years each. Going back to the IEC discussion with parties on which method of vote counting to implement when voting ends on election day, the truth is clear and simple. Four parties are taking part in the discussion and three of these are in favour of the counting of votes at various polling stations immediately after the closure of voting. The APRC does not support this idea, which was introduced by our God-fearing Bishop Solomon Tilewa Johnson at the time of the Sami Chieftaincy election. It is said that according to a letter dated 12 June and signed by the deputy administrative secretary Kebba Kinteh the APRC leadership demanded to know the rationale behind what it called the departure from the traditional method of counting which it argued has proven to be hitch-free, transparent and of less security risk. Well it appears that consultation with government is not the best in our situation. I have no doubt that Bishop Johnson as vice chairman of PIEC and returning officer for the Western Division in the 1996 presidential elections learnt some lessons which he decided to put into practice when he became Chairman of the IEC. The method of vote counting he has introduced cannot certainly be a source of convert for all parties especially the weak ones. I suggest that the APRC start to listen to and respect opposing views intended for greater transparency. The other side of the answer is that the traditional method the APRC referred to as hitch-free was so until before the 1996 presidential elections. In the history of elections in The Gambia the only election, which had the results that later, appeared in a foreign newspaper was the 1996 presidential elections. I can say that the PIEC made their move widely known by issuing a press release over Radio Gambia that some results of the presidential elections were going round but that they were not authentic because it was not signed. I am surprised that the APRC now want us to go by tradition in respect of vote counting. Where were the ears of the AFPRC Council members when parties wanted to maintain the tradition of holding presidential and National Assembly elections on the same day? Why was the ruling party conspicuously absent from the reconciliation meetings initiated by members of the student union after the January 1997 elections? While students were crying for justice following the death of Ebrima Barry, government security agents caused the nation to shed more tears by adding another 14 young corpses to that of Ebrima Barry. The European Union, the international community, individuals, embassies and high commissions all expressed concern over the matter but everyone was later disappointed with the cabinet's decision to reject the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission of Inquiry into April 10. But the APRC turned a deaf ear to the people's legitimate appeals for justice. During one of the debates of the National Assembly, I heard the Secretary of State for the Interior Ousman Badjie saying that it was for fear of revenge that the white man in South Africa opted for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Yes Mr. Man of Law but don't you think that it is far better than The Gambia government's amendment of the Indemnity Act as the basis for reconciliation and burying all the truth? Let us all retract our politics and save our country from the path of destruction, which is where we seem to be heading. Even our young people are aware that politics in The Gambia has never been worse than what it is today. Let me now leave all Gambians with these wise words from Maya Angelou, the black lady who was Bill Clinton's choice to compose a poem for his swearing in ceremony. "I don't tell everything I know, but what I do tell is truth. There's a world of difference between truth and facts. Facts can obscure the truth". "And still I rise" she said "you may write me down in history with your bitter twisted lies, you may trod me in the very dirt but still like dust I'll rise". So as an opposition sympathiser, I sound critical of the government but what I support is the truth. This is why I sometimes defend President Jammeh in opposition circles but he embarrassed me during his 'Meet the People Tour' last year when he said at a meeting in the Nianija area 'meng mang lafi mansa kunda la i te mansa kunda la kodo domola' (he who does not support the government will not benefit from the government money). This I heard one night during the highlights of the tour on Radio Gambia. It only sent me laughing as I said President Jammeh does not know but Mansa Kunda has no money. The money belongs to all Gambians Mansa Kunda is just a custodian to apply the funds for national development irrespective of tribe, religion or party affiliation. Next time I shall explain what it means to belong to a party but support the truth at all times to restore what Gambians are known for from colonial times, which makes us hospitable peace loving and law abiding. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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 You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask] if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------