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] <<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>