JABOU, again take your time, read, and understand.
CITIZENSHIP DOES NOT ENTITLE ONE TO A CLAIM FOR LAND.
DEMOCRACY IS NOT DISCRETE. IT IS AN EVOLVING PROCESS.....
DISTRIBUTION OF LAND, LIKE OTHER COMMODITIES MUST BE NEGOTIATED BY MUTUALLY-AGREED CONTRACTS.
REVISIT NATIVE-AMERICAN HISTORY. U.S. LAND POLICIES, GRANTS, ETC. NO-ONE SAID IT WAS FAIR. BUT YOU MUST AGREE ON A SOLUTION SYSTEM. IT DOES NOT SEEM LIKE YOU CAN DISCUSS EQUITABLE LAND DISTRIBUTION IN A DICTATORSHIP.
ONE SOLUTION IN THIS MATTER WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR GOVERNMENT TO PURCHASE THE LAND FROM THE MANNEH KUNDA KAABILOO AND THEN OFFER IT AS ENTICEMENT TO ENTERPRENEURS TO INVEST IN HOUSING PROJECTS, MINING, ETC.
DON'T YOU GET IT. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE LAND IN THE GAMBIA, PURCHASE IT. IF YOU CAN'T PURCHASE ONE, OFFER SOME VALUE COMPARABLE TO THE VALUE OF LAND YOU SEEK. THE NOTION OF EQUITABLE LAND DISTRIBUTION CAN NEVER BE REALISED UNLESS THE SUBSCRIBERS AGREE ON WHAT IS EQUITABLE WITHIN GEOLOGICAL, HYDROLOGICAL, AND SUBTERRANEAN LIMITS. SO CUT IT OUT (FOR WANT OF BETTER WORDS) ABOUT EVERYONE BORN IN GAMBIA MUST HAVE CLAIM TO LAND.
YOUR RESPONSE WAS TO MANNEH BUT SINCE IT WAS POSTED HERE, PLEASE ALLOW ME TO ELEVATE THE DISCUSSION.
BY VIRTUE OF A SACRED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TO AND NATIVE INDIANS THAT RECOGNIZES THE LEGITIMATE CLAIMS OF THE LATTER TO THESE UNITED STATES, THE NATIVE INDIANS WERE ALLOCATED LAND WHERE A CONCENTRATION OF THE TRIBES EXISTS AND THEIR INDUSTRY CAN FLOURISH. EASEMENTS THROUGH SUCH LAND FOR A PURPOSE OTHER THAN UTILITIES, DRAINAGE, WETLAND, OR NATURE RESERVE, MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH AN ACT OF CONGRESS. I REFER YOU TO SOME AMERICAN HISTORY AND LAND POLICY. THE IDEA IS RECOMPENSE. NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE INDIANS CLEARED THE LAND, OR THAT THEY INHABITED THE LAND FIRST, BUT BECAUSE IN ORDER TO HAVE THE LOT OF AMERICANS SUBSCRIBE TO A MODICUM OF DEMOCRACY-INDIANS INCLUDED-THEY CANNOT BEGIN BY DISPOSSESSING A ETHNIC GROUPS OF THEIR PROPERTY. BECAUUUUUSE, DEMOCRACY IS NOT A DISCRETE MODUS OPERANDUS. IT IS AN EVOLVING PROCESS OF GOVERNING SYSTEMS THAT AIMS AT COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE SUBSCRIBERS, INDUSTRY IN FREE ENTERPRISE AND SOCIAL WELFARE TO EQUALIZE RIGHTS TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS WITHOUT INFRINGING ON THE RIGHTS OF YOUR FELLOW SUBSCRIBERS TO ENJOY THE SAME.
THEREFORE, IT IS SELF-EVIDENT THAT BEFORE YOU CAN DISCUSS EQUITABLE LAND OWNERSHIP OR ACCESS THERETO, THE RECOGNITION OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS (LAND OWNERSHIP IS NOT A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT!!) HAS TO BE THE BASIS FROM WHICH THE SUBSCRIBERS CAN NEGOTIATE OTHER RIGHTS OR PRIVILEDGES (CAVEATS OF A DEMOCRACY) EITHER BY CONTRACT IN WHICH ACCEPTABLE CURRENCY OR KIND IS EXCHANGED IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PRIVILEDGE OR BY WAY OF GIFT OF FREE AND CLEAR TITLE. IN A NUTSHELL, YOU MUST HAVE THE CONDUIT OF DEMOCRACY AND WILLING PARTICIPANTS IN ORDER TO EVEN BEGIN DISCUSSING EQUITABLE LAND OWNERSHIP. MEANWHILE, I MUST DISAGREE WITH YOUR PREMISE OR PRESUMPTION THAT MERE CITIZENSHIP AFFORDS YOU RIGHTS TO A LAND CLAIM. LAND IS REAL PROPERTY AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, SOME PEOPLE ARE BORN IN THE AIR OR AT SEA. PARDON THE PUN.
THIS BRINGS US TO MY POINT. THE REASON FOR WANTING A DEMOCRACY IS SO THAT THE PERCEIVED UNFAIRNESS IN HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS CAN BE TEMPERED OR DONE AWAY WITH. WANTING A DEMOCRACY IS NOT ENOUGH. SOME FOLKS HAVE PLEDGED AND LOST THEIR LIVES JUST SO THEY OR THEIR HEIRS CAN SAY THAT EVERYONE OUGHT TO HAVE RIGHT TO LAND. SO I SUGGEST WE NOT PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT FAIRNESS OR EQUAL RIGHTS IN A SYSTEM OF DICTATORSHIP OR GOVERNANCE BY WHIM.
IN OTHER WORDS, SOME OR MOST OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS LOGICAL BUT THE LOGIC PRESUPPOSES A SPECIFIC PLATFORM CONDUCIVE TO DIALOGUE AND NEGOTIATION. THAT MUST BEGIN BY MR. NYANG RECOGNIZING HIS ERROR IN JUDGEMENT AND RETRACTING HIS INSINUATION OF TRIBALISM, SOMEONE BEING HELD ACCOUTABLE FOR UNJUSTIFIEABLE MURDER, THE CULPRITS OF KORO, AND THE STUDENTS' MURDERS BEING BROUGHT BEFORE AN UNFETTERED JUDICIARY, THE UNCONDITIONAL RELEASE OF DUMO, EARNING THE PRIVILEDGE OF AGENCY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MAJORITY OF GAMBIANS NOT STEALING IT.
IN GOD'S NAME I HOPE THIS SIMPLISTIC EXPLANATION OF PRIORITIZING THE USE OF OUR ENERGIES AND SKILLS WILL PUT THIS LAND DEBATE TO REST TO BE REVISITED AFTER DEMOCRACY. MEANWHILE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU MAY GATHER AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE SO THAT YOU MAY BE USEFUL IN THE DEBATE AFTER A DEMOCRACY IS REALISED. FOR NOW, LET US USE THIS VEHICLE OF G-L JUDICIOUSLY AND BE INDUSTRIOUS WITH YOUR TIME. AT THE VERY LEAST YOU MAY CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION PRIVATELY AND SPARE THE REST OF US THE CHAGRIN.
YOU ARE ALL WONDERFUL CITIZENS.
SONS OF AFRIKA. ENGINEER CORPS
>From: Jabou Joh <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: State Land?
>Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 22:36:53 EDT
>
>Manneh,
>
>I see that you are mixing two very different issues here, so perhaps I should
>have made myself very clear when I commented on this issue. Please let me
>make it emphatically clear that i am not discussing this land because I am
>trying to defend Taf being given the land in Brufut. That is what started
>this debate, but the Taf affair is a mess created by the Jammeh regime in
>that they took land that was previously allocated to him for whatever
>underhanded reason, and they are now trying to clean up that mess, or at
>least make it appear so by giving him this land in Brufut. I am not defending
>any of that at all. I actually do not condone handing over any land that
>others have been living on or farming without consulting them.
>
>Likewise, I also do not condone the underhanded tactics of the Jammeh regime
>as far as this whole Taf affair is concerned in relation to the first piece
>of land that was taken away from him.
>If Jammeh is engaged in some pre-election PR and trying to remedy this
>situation by shooting from the hip as usual, that is their affair.
>
>However, this issue about who the land belongs to is the debate that was
>sparked by that whole discussion, and land ownership in The Gambia as it is
>now is what concerns me, and what I am trying to address.
>
>What i am commenting on here is the fact that some Gambians have land that
>they claim belongs to their klan and is therefore their's, while othersl,
>like myself for example, cannot make this claim. As someone whose klan does
>not have self procalimed title to any large piece of land where a parcel can
>be given to me without paying for it, if I need land, I have to have the
>money to pay for it and I find that to be grossly unfair.
>
>You say that since my father is originally from Senegal, there must be land
>there that our ancestors have claim to. Well, is that not the same point I
>tried to make when I asked why you wanted to know where I am from.
>
>You say that it was just a question, and yet, you have used the answer to
>tell me where I can go and claim land, Senegal, when I am Gambia born and
>bred and very much a Gambian by this single fact alone. If this is the case,
>why then should I have to go to another country that is not my country to lay
>claim to land there? Clearly, this was the reason you asked the question
>regarding family origin in the first place.
>
>You asked why there are countries if people did not own land. Well, this is
>elementary and does not follow the same logic. Countries are organized around
>groups of people who have something or want something in common, and then
>within that parcel of land that constitutes the country, individuals have a
>system whereby they can acquire land, which is a fundamental part of being a
>citizen, and this system should not be inequitable as it is in The Gambia.
>
>Therefore, it stands to logic then that everyone who calls themselves a
>citizen of that country should be entitled to acquire land there and the
>acquisition of such land should be uniform, either everyone buys land, or
>everyone can make claim to some land without buying it. Any other method is
>unfair and inequitable.
>There cannot be some of the people who say the land is their's just because
>they got there first, and their ancestors cut down the trees. It would be
>total chaos in the whole World if this were the case.
>
>These ancestors may have cleared the farmland when they first got there
>because it was what was necessary in order for them to be able to use the
>land. However, what we now have is a country where there is supposed to be a
>demoratic system in place, or at least that is what we say we are fignting
>for. This system is a system of laws that protect everyone's interest, and it
>is the advantage of enjoying this protection as a society, a group, that
>brings people together to form a country.
>
>Once this happens, everything should then be decided on an equitable
>footing.One cannot say we are all gambians, but at the same time say to the
>rest of those who form this unit called a country, "sorry, but most of this
>land was already mine, so let's just say we have a country together, but not
>when it comes to land."
>
>When countries are organized, laws are put into place for the protection of
>the rights of every citizen. Therefore, we cannot operate on systems that
>were the norm before the country was organized, or by systems that were put
>into place or reinforced by our colonial masters whose only interest was to
>pacify us while they extracted what they wanted from our lands.
>
>If one wants to follow an old system of land ownership, then perhaps it would
>have been more suitable to have stayed in those communities that they cleared
>and farmed, and not look to have both the advantage of belonging to an
>organized country and still enjoy the priviledges of not adopting a system of
>land ownership that is fair to the country as a whole.
>
>What we are talking about here is simple logic. it is utterly ridiculous to
>say that one owns large tracts of land in a country simply by virtue of the
>fact that ones ancestors cleared and farmed it long before the country was
>organized. We are talking about a fair and equitable and uniform system of
>land allocation that is suitable for a democratic country, and one in which
>every citizen wants to be treated with fairness and equality in every aspect
>of life. One cannot aspire for and expect fairness if some aspects of the
>system are clearly unfair. Whether one wants to face this issue and discuss
>and resolve it or not, it is not one that will just go away because someone
>says that their ancestors cleared the land.
>
>Pennsylvania was land given to Willaim Penn by the king of England in
>pre-independence days. Likewise, families in the Southern part of the United
>States held huge parcels of land during the time of slavery and up to the
>civil war. There were also other families who held very large pieces of land
>here in the U.S. In general, all people in the World cleared new and virgin
>lands they went to settlle.These people do not control all this land now.
>The Native Americans do not have the sole right to the land here, and
>arrogantly appoint themselves the "giver" of land to other groups or
>individuals even though they were here before, and i am sure their ancestors
>cleared a forest or two. If land ownership should be based on who cleared
>which piece of land, then there is still a good bit of land in Gambia that is
>thick forest, and yielding a machete does not make it one's private property.
>
>Is it logical that one should divide a country up among klans, especially
>when there are other groups in the same country who do not have the same
>priviledge?
>I do not think so.
>
>You wrote:
>
>"There were tiny kingdoms, like the Kombo, Niumi, Badibu kingdoms etc, and
>within these kingdoms we had clans. So if you are taking to task the
>traditional way of land ownership, then maybe you shouldtravel back in time
>and change the way Africans had always lived their lives."
>
>Well Mr Manneh, what I can say to this is that, what we now have here, or are
>attempting to have is a democracy , and not a kingdom. A democracy where each
>of us expects fairness, peace and prosperity, and this calls for the
>revisiting of certain ways of doing things for the greater good of the
>society as a whole. Again, we cannot expect to benefit by a system and yet
>not contribute to it's sustainance at the same time. One cannot have it both
>ways.
>
>Have a good weekend.
>
>Auntie Jabou Joh
>
>In a message dated 7/6/2001 2:53:52 AM Central Daylight Time, [log in to unmask]
>writes:
>
>
>
> Mrs Joh,
> Why do you resent the question I asked of where you were born? There is
>nothing sinister in it,
> just a simple straight forward question. I asked it merely because I had a
>chance to speak
> to my dad, and he reassured me that, anyone from a farming community
>understands what land
> ownership is all about? If I had wanted to ask you otherwise, rest assured I
>shall ask you it in simple
> and straightforward manner.
> I learnt that you were born in Janjangburreh, but is it not also true that
>in fact your dad actually
> originated
> from Senegal. If you were to make enquiries am sure you will realize that
>his clan/family too owned l
> and. ( I am a cousin to your nieces and nephews, so you see we are all one
>big family here).
>
> If your argument that land should belong to everyone is to be taken
>seriously by me, then I ask
> this: why do do we have countries? Why cannot we move freely from one place
>to the other?
> That is a principle which would be great but we live in the real world, and
>as such people have
> claims to things, yes, even land. I am not at all ashamed of fighting for my
>cousins' rights to house
> their families, I will not apologize for it either.
>
> "However, i also want to say that in our fight for justice, let us not be
> selective. If we seek justice, we must be prepared to seek it in every
> aspect pf Gambian life. It has become too easy for folks to just try to
>use
> the word tribalism as a scare tactic to shut others up because they think
> that everyone will consider it politically incorrect and run and hide."
>
> The justice to be fought here is quite simple really. Land has been divided
>up among young men
> so as build houses for their young families. Due to Brufut's proximity to
>the Tourist Development
> Area, some selfish businessman thinks that actually he needs the land more
>than they do, even
> though he and his family are comfortably housed somewhere else. He needs the
>land to build houses
> to sell at a Dmill or more. So now you tell me, where is this justice you
>are talking about?
> Lets for instance forget about this Traditional land ownership, do you think
>it fair and even humane for
> one man's eagerness to make himself even richer override the need of some
>poor villagers to house themselves
> and their families? If there is a need for concerted effort for justice then
>nothing deserves
> it more than this. Today, the 6th July 2001, could become a very sad day for
>us, as today is the day that
> the military will go ahead and demolish the simple mud houses some of them
>have scraped for to build.
> Why, because their rights to housing is not as important as Taf's eagerness
>to make more millions.
> So please remember in them your prayers today, for I know they are not going
>to stand helplessly and
> see their houses razed to the ground. Where is the justice, you tell me
>people of the L!!
>
> I think the tribalistic tendencies should be much more appropriately taken
>up with Mr Nyang.
> I cannot speak for any other family with regards to Traditional Land
>Ownership, but I can speak for
> mine. We came to own our land because our forebears broke their backs to cut
>down the forests
> and turned it into farmlands centuries ago. If some other clan was busy
>doing something else and as
> such their families down the line do not have land to farm or live on, then
>I suggest they go back in
> time and sort it out with their forebears.
>
> "We have to be careful about being very
> eager to address only those wrongs that are not to our advantage and
>try to
> ignore, cover up or pass over those that directly involve our
>personal or
> family, or group interests. One cannot afford to seem to give the
>imptession
> of being cunning at the expense of other people."
>
> I am not trying to address this issue because it affects my family, I was
>sick to my guts because
> the greed of a single man and his readiness to rob people of that most
>fundamental of human
> rights, a place to live in. No one is trying to be cunning here, not from my
>side I can assure you.
> You live in the USA, have you ever asked the Indians why they always argue
>that they own the land?
> Am sure there are a lot of people who are Americans by birth too, does it
>mean that they can build
> and farm anywhere they like. It so is not the case here in the UK. There
>still are traditional land
> owners here (or as they call them land lords. They lease out their land to
>farmers)
>
> " Am I to believe that my Gambian brothers and sisters whose klans, groups,
>etc
> can lay claim to land and other groups are not entitled to the same
> priviledge actually consider that just? If we are all Gambians, then I think
> we need to revisit this land issue and make sure we put a fair system in
> place where every Gambian can acquire land in a uniform manner. I cannot see
> myself as comrades to people who say they abhor injustice and are fighting
> for justice with me, but who at the same time conveniently chuck this land
> issueto tribalism when it is very clear that definitley not all Gambians have
> equal rights when it comes to this issue."
>
> Mrs Joh, we are very fair in the way we allocate land to people. We gave a
>whole village
> to Ghanaians(Ghan Town), there are countless Senegalese, Guineans (mostly
>Fulas, a village
> call Pa Tubey ya), Manjagoes (Yuna village), Malians and even Europeans who
>my family has
> given land to, and all it cost them them was the price of a kilo or so of
>kola nuts. There is a village
> call Madiana, on the outskirts of Brufut, my family gave it to Jolas for
>free.
> So if one man wants to take countless hectares of our land in his eagerness
>to enrich himself even more,
> I think that is what what should make any fair minded person's blood boil
>
> "I am no tribalist, but I think that this land affair is something
>that
> definitely needs to be looked at. It just does not make sense to me
>that some
> Gambians can have claim to certain lands when this is not evenly
>applied as
> far as every group in Gambia is concerned.
> Am I to believe that my Gambian brothers and sisters whose klans,
>groups, etc
> can lay claim to land and other groups are not entield to the same
> priviledge actually consider that just? If we are all Gambians, then
>I think
> we need to revisit this land issue and make sure we put a fair
>system in
> place where every Gambian can acquire land in a uniform manner. I
>cannot see
> myself as comrades to people who say they abhor injustice and are
>fighting
> for justice with me, but who at the same time conveniently chuck
>this land
> issueto tribalism when it is very clear that definitley not all
>Gambians have
> equal rights when it comes to this issue."
>
> Mrs Joh, I tell you something which am sure is deluding you here, there was
>no such place as The
> Gambia when we owned these lands. So how can it belong to all Gambians? Even
>the white Europeans/colonialist
> recognized traditional land ownership, for after all when they wanted to
>settle in
> the then Bathurst, they bought it form the King of Niumi( or Kombo).
> There were tiny kingdoms, like the Kombo, Niumi, Badibu kingdoms etc, and
>within these kingdoms
> we had clans. So if you are taking to task the traditional way of land
>ownership, then maybe you should
> travel back in time and change the way Africans had always lived their
>lives. Lord people could be born in
> the UK, but they still do not have right to land. Land was and is still
>owned by traditional owners here.
> There is a plague at my former university saying how the land it stands on
>was donated in 1862 by
> Lord Henry Robinson Hartley whose family has since time immemorial owned
>that part of Southampton.
>
> Have a good day
> Manneh >>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.