-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Foroyaa Burning Issues From: "Amie Sillah" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, September 20, 2004 1:01 pm To: [log in to unmask] Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issues Issue No. 74/2004, 13-15 September, 2004 Editorial THE STRIFE FOR QUALITY EDUCATION The results of the Gambia Basic Certificate Examination have been announced. However the Department of State for Education could not but admit that performance has dropped particularly in Mathematics and English. The pass rate in the four core subjects this year are as follows: English 13.06 % (1/8), Mathematics 10.00 % (1/10), Science 18.16% (1/6) and Social and Environmental Studies 42.22 %. The slogan of the Department is for education to be accessible, affordable and of good quality. While a lot has been achieved regarding access, affordability and quality are still a thorn in the flesh. Education, especially senior secondary school education is beyond the means of many parents. Many students have to stay away from school for some time during the academic year, which has effect on their performance. Secondly, even though the building structures are there the facilities are lacking. The students lack textbooks mainly because they cannot afford them. Teachers lack teaching materials because schools lack adequate funds. Thirdly, the size of the class is still a problem. Sometimes classes take up to 60 students. This makes teaching less effective and affects performance. Fourthly, the double shift system, which allows for internal expansion has serious flaws. The teacher gets exhausted after the morning session and his or her performance is low in the afternoon compared to the morning. The double shift system only eases the problem. It cannot serve as a solution. The quality of teachers is a problem. A lot of teachers within the educational system are unqualified. This has a negative effect on the quality of education. Sixthly, teachers need motivation to teach well and remain within the educational system. Very few Gambians are motivated to continue as teachers. They are always looking for other avenues. Teachers often complain of condition of teaching particularly in the rural areas where even salaries are paid late. Unless the problems outlined above are addressed poor performance in schools will continue to be the order of the day. OCEAN BAY HOTEL Generator in Trouble? Reports reaching FOROYAA talks that a new one-megawatt generator belonging to Ocean Bay Hotel “exploded” and suffered serious damage. This put it out of use. The cost of generator is about 20 million dalasis. The reports say because the generator is inoperative NAWEC has diverted supply to ensure electricity supply. What is more interesting about the reports is that it is claimed that a second generator, which could have served the hotel, has been taken to Kanilai for use. The President is reported to promise to provide a replacement. We approached the Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation for comment but after several weeks there is yet to be comment. We hope that now that the reports are public the Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation will speak out. DRIVERS COMPLAIN OF NEW POLICY By Pateh Baldeh The Gambia Transport Association has been accused by drivers plying the Brikama/Serrekunda route of changing the rules of the car park without informing them. Many drivers who talked to our reporter said it was just on Friday the 10th September 2004 when they were asked by the Association members and the Police in Brikama not to reach the car park. The reason for doing so was not spelt out to them until late in the day when they were informed that work on the car park was soon to commence; but that until Tuesday 14th September 2004 they said they had not seen any work going on in the said car park. They complained that it was the Association in collaboration with t! he Police who have taken the decision and failed to ask them their opinion about the whole issue. They said they are also forced to pay duty to the Association amounting to D2.00 which they claim should be done on a daily basis but that they paid twice or even more as some of them were asked to pay after every trip. They said that the policy is a bad one because in Serrekunda they pay only once in the day. The system they claim has prevented many of the drivers from going to Brikama and in fact caused a serious shortage of transport on Tuesday 14th September 2004. The drivers say that they are not also allowed to drive from Brikama to Westfield Junction and that the Bundung Car Park does not favour them in getting enough passengers to meet the cost of fuel. They claim that the payment they are doing to the Transport Association should not be compulsory on them, because some of them are not members of the association. Our reporter went to the Association members responsible of the car park but they declined to make comment on the issue. Passengers also complained that they are suffering a great deal because of the new policy; that this is creating a lot of transport difficulties and making them lose their products as some of them are vendors traveling from Brikama to the Serrekunda market. The passengers indicated the burden of economic hardship on them is increasing every day. Editor: When the Police PRO was contacted he denied that they were enforcing the payment of the D2. He explained that at a meeting of members of the GTCA they agreed to contribute a token sum for developmental purposes. He however acknowledged that contributions cannot be compulsory. The role of the police can only be persuasive, encouraging drivers to pay. FOROYAA will continue to monitor the situation. Needless to say, no one can compulsorily take money from any other person unless it is provided for by law. Collecting money to contribute to development is noble but once compulsion is used without the backing of law the act becomes unlawful. SARE NGAI WARD BY-ELECTION Sare Ngai Ward in the Wuli West Constituency, Upper River Division is to have a by -election next month. The IEC has issued a press release stating that following the notification from the Basse Area Council of a vacancy in the Council, will hold a By-Election for the Sare Ngai Ward, on Thursday 4th October 2004. Nomination of candidates will be on Monday 27th September 2004 at the IEC Regional Office in Basse. Campaign is from Wednesday 29th September to Tuesday 12th October 2004. TRIAL OF SEEDY FANNEH CONTINUES By Pateh Baldeh The trial of Seedy Fanneh is a test case for human rights protection and the effectiveness of avenues for redress. Readers would recall that Seedy Fanneh, a resident of Brikama Madina had lodged a complaint to the Inspector General of Police after being allegedly tortured by the Brikama Police. Despite his complaint he was taken to court and on Tuesday 24th August 2004 when he appeared before the Magistrates Court in Brikama he applied for an adjournment. He told the court he had a lawyer who should take his case and was granted adjournment to the 13th September 2004. Mr. Fanneh appeared in court on the 13th day of September. When the case was mentioned for hearing the magistrate informed the court that Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, counsel for the accused had written a letter to the court applying for adjournment. The letter was given to the prosecutor to read. The magistrate sought his opinion. He had no objection for adjournment. The case was then adjourned to the 29th September 2004, with the same bail condition. FOROYAA will continue to inform its readers of any development in this case. The Paul Commission Sitting of Monday 13th Sept. 2004 By Aboulie G.Dibba Testifying before the Paul Commission on Monday, Pa Ousman Jammeh indicated that from July 1994 to October 1994 he was Deputy Permanent Secretary at the Department of State for Agriculture, and as Permanent Secretary at the same department. He was moved to Lands and Local Government as Permanent Secretary from April to October 2001 and then from October 2001 to June 2002, he went on a special leave. Mr. Jammeh testified that this period is called special leave because he was given a dismissal letter and when he was re-instated, it was indicated in the re-instatement letter that that period be considered a special leave without pay. He indicated that when he was re-instated, he was Permanent Secretary at the Department of State for Agriculture and that in April 2003, he was moved to Works, Construction and Infrastructural Development.! Continuing his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that from 1994 to date, he has no other source of income except that during his special leave, he received assistance from friends and relatives. He indicated that the highest cash assistance he received during this period was US $500. He pointed out that even though he engaged in farming, it is for consumption only and at times he does sell but that too is below D5, 000. He testified that he is not a shareholder of any company and that he has no investment whatsoever whether in treasury bills or petty business. He indicated that he has not benefited from loan whether government, institutions or individuals between 1994 to date and has not sold any family property where he derived income. Continuing his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that sometimes he made savings from his per diems, which goes to finance his building project in Kotu South. He pointed out that at times he puts these savings in a bank account and sometimes he spends them. He indicated that he paid his per diem in his bank account. He said he sometimes saved between 30 % to 75% of his per diem depending on the hospitability of his hosts. He pointed out that between 1996 to date, he could not recall any time that he returned from a trip without saving. Mr. Jammeh testified that his salary goes directly to the bank and that he is banking with Standard Chartered Bank. He indicated that July 1994 to date, he could not recollect anyone paying money into his account. He is to produce his statement of accounts within seven working days. Testifying further, Mr. Jammeh pointed out that his income does not come to him directly even though he used some of the income for family up-keep which he benefits from. Mr. Jammeh indicated that his wife was on scholarship studies and after the scholarship programme, she was engaged on work and studies and that when she was returning home in 2002, she came with some money but how much he could not tell. He pointed out that he has never sent a butut to the wife; that instead, the wife was sending him money. Continuing his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that the vehicle under self in the declaration form, the Renault 5 and 11 belong to him but that the third vehicle was shipped by his wife even though he registered it in his name because the wife was not town at the time. He was asked to furnish the Commission with the necessary document for the shipping of the car within the same 7 working days. Mr. Jammeh testified that his wife has a plot of land in Sanyang and that is where she put the funds she came with. Mr. Jammeh pointed out that during his time as Permanent Secretary, Department of State for Lands and Local Government, Mr. Nai Ceesay was the Secretary of State for Lands and Local Government. Mr. Jammeh indicated that he left the department before the crisis on the three layouts started. He indicated that he has not been allocated a plot in the three layouts, and neither his relatives nor friends ha! ve been allocated; that he has never appeared before any committee or security agent for questioning regarding the three layouts. Mr. Jammeh testified that between 1994 to date, he was not allocated land and that he did not purchase any but pointed out that he has three landed properties in Brikama and he is presently staying in one of them which is a three bedroom bungalow; that in the second one his sister built a two bedroom and parlour and she is living there; the third he bought at a time when the three sides were already fenced and then he completed the third remaining side. He pointed out that other than fencing, no work is taking place at the third property. Mr. Jammeh indicated that in his Kotu South property which is a storey building with three bedrooms on the top floor and one bedroom, sitting room, kitchen and toilet. He indicated that he completed the deck early this year (2004) and that work is going on the second floor in which he invested D150, 000 from foun! dation to the present level. At this stage, he was asked by the Chairman of the Commission whether this D150, 000 includes materials and labour, which he answered in the positive. He was asked to furnish the Commission with all the receipts for the purchase of materials within the same 7 working days. Mr. Jammeh indicated that that his wife built two small rooms in her Sanyang property and that she did no development in her Bijilo property. Mr. Jammeh denied owning any property in Busumbala and that he does not undertake any development in the family property in Brikama. Continuing his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that his wife operates a savings account and he has never given her any money to deposit in that account. He pointed out that he did not know when his wife opened that account but that he will find out from her. He indicated that part of the money in his wife’s savings account belongs to the wife’s brother who is living in Sweden with his family. Moving towards the end of his testimony, Mr. Jammeh pointed out that he once supervised building projects for two of his friends, one in Sweden and the other in the United States of America. He indicated that he has no investment in jewelry, and that he had no insurance policy. He indicated that he is not responsible for the education or maintenance of anybody outside The Gambia as Permanent Secretary, he signed contracts but the tendering and awarding were the responsibility of others. He said he does not recommend! anybody for a contract. He concluded his testimony by saying that he has never received any gift from anybody. The next witness to testify on Monday 13th September 2004 was Tenneh Mba (Manneh) Jaiteh, Permanent Secretary, Department of State for Finance and Economic Affairs. She testified that she has been Senior Secretary to Department of Finance and Economic Affairs, Acting PMO, Permanent Secretary for Trade, Industry and Employment and currently she is the Permanent Secretary, Department of State for Finance and Economic Affairs. She testified that other than her official emoluments, she has no other source of income, and that her official emoluments include her allowances contained in the assets evaluation form which she submitted to the commission. She pointed out that her husband is a Civil Engineer working with the Department of State for! State for Works, Construction and Infrastructural Development. She indicated in her testimony that she is paying the school fees of her first child. She pointed out that the property indicated in the asset declaration form is a freehold situated in Sukuta Sanchaba measuring 50 metres by 30 metres and that when they were leasing it, they were informed that the plot is more than the normal residential plot, so it is leased as two plots but in actual fact it is one plot. Continuing her testimony, Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that the property belongs to her husband and not her and that the property was developed in 2001 with a three bedroom bungalow and that she does not contribute anything towards the development of the property. Mrs. Jaiteh stated in her testimony that she was allocated a plot in Nema-Sutu but that she has requested for a re-allocation in Tanji but that no development is taking place in the Tanji property. She pointed out that even though she has another plot in Brufut for which she is paying rate, she has no title deed or document to show ownership. Asked by the commission whether that is safe, she said it is a family agreement between her and the uncle. She testified that the three bedroom bungalow was started in 2002 and that it has been roofed but the windows and doors are yet to be fixed. She pointed out that she invested D100, 000 so far. She said this is the property in Brufut. She testified that the husband has a property in Jabang, Kombo North and that he purchased the plot. At this stage, she was asked to furnish the commission with documents within the same 7 working days. Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that she has no farm and is not a shareholder of any company. She testified that the value of the jewelry she bought from 1995 to 1997 is between £500 to £700 but that she could not produce the receipts in respect of the purchase. She pointed out that her sister sent her the money she used to purchase a 2 KV generator but she could not produce receipts. Mrs. Jaiteh indicated in her testimony that the car indicated in the form was jointly purchased. She contributed D15, 000 and the husband the rest. She said she is operating a savings and current account with IBC and that she has not benefited from any bank loan but government loan which she is still servicing, and that she could not tell whether he husband has benefited from any loan facility. ! Moving towards the end of her testimony, Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that she made some savings from her per diem and that she is not responsible for the education or maintenance of anybody outside The Gambia. She ended by testifying that when she was returning from UK in 1998 she came with some cash. FOCUS ON CEDAW The Initial, Second and Third Reports Amie Sillah Reporting Article 10 Equality In The Field Of Education The Article is very comprehensive; it recognises the importance of education in enabling women and men to participate on an equal footing in all aspects of life in their countries. It provides thus: State Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in order to ensure to them equal rights with men in the field of education and in particular to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women: (a) The same conditions for career and vocational guidance, for access to studios and for the achievement of diplomas in educational establishments of all categories in rural as well as in urban area; this equality shall be ensured in preschool, general, technical education, professional and higher education, as well as in all types of vocational training; (b) Access to the same curricula, the same examinations, teaching staff with qualifications of the same standard and school premises and equipment of the same quality; (c) The elimination of any stereotyped concept of the roles of men and women at all levels and in all forms of education by encouraging coeducation and other types of education which will help to achieve this aim and, in particular, by the revision of text books and school programmes and the adaptation of teaching methods; (d) The same opportunities to benefit from scholarships and other study grants; (e) The same opportunities for access to programmes of continuing, including adult and functional literacy programmes, particularly those aimed at reducing, at the earliest possible time, any gap in education, existing between men and women; (f) The education of female student dropout rates and the organisation of programmes for girls and women who have left school prematurely (g) The same opportunities to participate actively in sports and physical education; (h) Access to specific educational information to help to ensure the health and well being of families, including information and advice on family planning.” Here even though there are not laws, which discriminate against the education of girls, there is evidence of social discrimination, as boys are always favoured. This Article therefore enjoins government to double its efforts at ensuring that girls of school going age are enrolled in schools. One important factor that has placed women at a disadvantaged position vis-à-vis men in terms of their economic development and political participation and their lack of access to education. According to the 1993 census, only 27% of adult women in The Gambia are literate whilst male literacy rate is twice as high at 55%. The urban rural divide cuts across female population with regard to literacy level, 40% of urban females are literate Vs 18.3% or rural female. The ramifications of these differentials in literacy rates are compelling. For women in rural and urban areas, high rate of illiteracy is linked with economic hardships and drudgery as well as dependency and uncertainty. Most important, illiteracy is directly connected to hosts of social and poverty indicators such as maternal morbidity, infant mortality, children’s malnutrition and illness. Also women’s illiteracy is linked to neglect of children’s education, especially the girl child. In the rural areas, Women’s illiteracy means that they are further disadvantaged in terms of access to information and participation in rural development programmes to improve productivity, farming technology and marketing skills. Improving women’s literacy and access to education will enable the to function as individuals. Further, illiterate women are unable to move into more attractive white collar salaried positions such as Managers, technicians, field extension workers and researchers, in public and private agricultural sectors or to move out of farming and agriculture altogether. Poor level literacy deepen rural women’s dependence on men and few educated urban elite women to articulate their needs. Ever the National Council for women requires basic level of literacy for aspirants to leadership and representative roles (Women’s Bureau 1999). Improving Women’s literacy is both a right on its own and it is also an enabling right in the sense that it enables the person to be aware of and demand other rights due to her. In response, government has designed and implemented several adult literacy projects from the 1970s to date. The vast majority of beneficiaries were women. In realization of the urgent need to correct the imbalance with regards to girls’ education, a multi – sectoral working group on girls’ education was established at the Department of State for Education. The main objective of this working group was to identity policies, strategies for attraction and retention of girls in the education system. A lot sensitisation campaign was under the aegis of the working group. The Department of state for education in collaboration with the Department of State for Health is currently making an attempt to revive the drive towards promoting girl’s education. There is therefore a proposal to establish a steering committee on the education and health of the girl child. This steering committee has a child mandate incorporating health concerns of the girl child. Furthermore, the Department of State for Education has set up a Girl’s Education Unit within the Department. One of its mandate is to ensure that young girls are not deprived of the benefit of their fundamental Right to Education. Several measures have been adopted by the Department of State in attaining its objectives of ensuring education for young girls. One such measure is the establishment of the scholarship trust Fund for Girls. The Trust Fund is designed to enhance access, retention and performance of the Girl-child within the school system. On the policy level, the Education Policy 1988 –2003 was recently revised to take on board the special concerns of the girl child. Hitherto, the policy gave very little attention to the girl child. It is expressly stated in the Revised Education Policy that: “A further fundamental issue (for the education system) is that of equity and the reduction of gender disparities by ensuring that girls and women gain access to education and achieve a high retention rate in each of the programme areas.” In the same vein the Education Master Plan stresses on the urgent need to increase girls Gross Enrolment Ratio at the lower Basic Level, from 60 % in 1996 to 73 per cent by 2002. During the same period, the Gross Enrolment Ratio for Girls at the Upper Basic level is expected to rise from 34 percent to 47 percent. However, despite all these efforts enrolment and literacy rates for females remain much lower than those of males. The 1996 Education Statistics reveal a very unfavourable picture of the population aged 10 years and over, 54.4% of males are literate whereas only 26.4% of females are literate. At the National level 40.1 percent of males Children of School going age (i.e. males aged 7 to 22 years) are enrolled compared to 28.6 percent of females. A look at literacy and enrolment rates by gender and Local Government Areas suggests that in all these areas the females lag behind. The gender gap is however more pronounced in rural areas than in urban areas. This is because the social, cultural and poverty factors that inhibit girls education, are more obvious in these areas. This trend has not changed as revealed in the Multiple Indicator Cluster report, 2000. The report indicates that less than half (36) percent of the population over 15 years in The Gambia is literate. Overall male literacy rates have been found to be almost double the female literacy rates (48% for males against 25% for females). The rates being lower in the rural areas than in the urban areas. The more recent Education For All (EFA) Report 2000 indicates that literacy rates remain constant at 37.2 percent from 1991 – 1994 and then dropped slightly and remained constant at 37.1% ! from 1995 to 1998. The implication of all the above statistics is that Government is faced with a Herculean task as far as redressing the present education imbalance is concern. With education and increase awareness, the Gambian women will be well equipped and empowered to assert their rightful position in society. Lack of education leading to less qualification is inter alia, the Major stumbling block in the advancement of Gambian women. e-Government Project Telecommunication To Be Liberalised The Gambia Government has started executing the first phase of its pilot e-Government Project which will involve connecting 10 departments of states using a computer system. This was revealed in a press release issued by the department of state for communication, information and technology. It is hoped that this will enable the departments concerned to communicate regularly on administrative and other official matters. It is also expected to foster the sharing of information and data among the governments departments and with the public. The equipment required for this project is already at the Department of State for Communication Information and Technology and installation will soon begin Meanwhile, an offer to train 30 of its officials in Ghana has been secured by the Gambia government. The trainees according to the press release will be drawn from various departments and the initial focus will be on network installation and maintenance, network security and web design and management. Participants will be expected to serve as trainers and focal points for e-Government. Meanwhile, the department has promised to further liberalise the telecommunication industry in the Gambia with the overall goal of making ICTs universally accessible and affordable to all citizens. Below are websites of various government departments and other institutions; NewGambia.gm achievements, plans for future development StateHouse.gm Office of the President; policies, speeches, news GambiaWomen.gm Women’s Bureau, role of Gambian women Gambia.gm Dept. of State for Trade, Industry & Employment DosCIT.gm Dept. of State for Communications, Information & Technology EduGambia.gm Dept. of State for Education GamPost.gm Postal services, policies and regulations GRTS.gm National broadcaster (TV and Radio); news Gamtel.gm the national telecommunications operator; plans for development of telecom infrastructure GamInfo.gm news and information from The Gambia Daily GIPFZA.gm information on investment opportunities NationalAssembly.gm legislature: members and processes JammehFoundation.gm activities of the Jammeh Foundation for Peace VisitTheGambia.gm tourism-related information NRS.gm National Records Service; slavery, slave trade Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issues Issue No. 75/2004, 20-22 September, 2004 Editorial PRISONS: LOOKING UP TO HIGHER STANDARDS Many see the prison as a dumping ground for outfits of society rather than a correctional institution that reforms the convict to enable him/her to join the main stream of society. There is need for attitudinal change including those within the prison system. In a recent interview with the Secretary of State for the Interior and Religious Affairs regarding the situation of Baba Jobe, he did indicate that by law convicted prisoners are not allowed visits until they have served at least three months. He is quite right. Section 53 of the Prisons Act states: ‘Subject to the provisions of this Act, a convicted criminal prisoner shall be allowed one visit from friends after he has completed three months of his sentence, and thereafter according to progressive stages or as a reward for good conduct in accordance with rules made under this Act.” Why deprive a convict a visit for three months? Furthermore Section 56(1) of the Act also states: “Subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, every prisoner other than a convicted prisoner shall be given all reasonable opportunities of communication with his friends or legal adviser and may write and receive letters.” This means that a convicted prisoner who is deprived of visits for three months is also not allowed to write or receive letters. What is the minimum international standard required? According to Part 1 (Rules of General Application) of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners “ Prisoners are to be allowed regular contact with family and friends, by both correspondence and personal visits. Prisoners are to be kept informed of current events and important items of news.” The state should strive to attain this standard. Prisoners and their relatives should realise that according to Section 21(4) every judge, member of cabinet, divisional commissioner or justice of peace “may when he thinks fit enter into and examine the conditions of any prison ….. and may enter any observations he may think fit to make in reference to the condition of the prison or the abuses therein in the visitors book to be kept by the officer in charge and it shall be the duty of the officer in charge to draw the attention of the superintendent and of the visiting committee at this or their n! ext visit to the prison to any entries made in such book.” This is a safeguard for any prisoner or relative who has a complaint of abuse. BABA JOBE’S ASSETS IS GOVERNMENT DEFYING THE SECURITY COUNCIL? Apart from the nationwide broadcast by the Gambia Government that it intends to freeze the assets of the former Majority Leader of the National Assembly in compliance with UN Security Council resolution, nothing is clear about the government’s intentions and actions. Legal documents show that Baba K. Jobe owns 99 % of the shares of Millennium Air but this company has not seized operation. There have also been reports in the local press of Baba Jobe’s transport in motion. This needs clarification by the authorities. Needless to say, Resolution 1532 (2004) of the UN Security Council is quite explicit. It stipulates in paragraph 1 that the Security Council, “Decides that, to prevent former Liberian President, Charles Taylor, his immediate family members, in particular Jewel Howard Taylor and Charles Taylor Jr., senior officials of the former Taylor regime, or other close allies or associates as designated by the committee established by paragraph 21 of resolution 1521 (2003) (hereinafter, ‘the committee’) from using misappropriated funds and property to interfere in the restoration of peace and stability in Liberia and the sub-region, all states in which they are, at the date of adoption of this resolution or at any time thereafter, funds, other assets and economic resources owned or controlled directly or indirectly by Charles Taylor, Jewel Howard Taylor, and Charles Taylor Jr. and / or those individuals designated ! by the committee, including funds, other financial assets and economic resources held by entities owned or controlled directly or indirectly, by any of them or by any persons acting on their behalf or at their direction, as designated by the Committee, shall freeze without delay all such funds, other financial assets and economic resources, and shall ensure that neither these nor any other funds, other financial assets or economic resources are made available by their nationals, or by any persons within their territory, directly or indirectly, to or for the benefit of such persons.” Well, what has this resolution got to do with Baba Jobe? Pursuant to Resolution 1521 (2003) of the Security Council the Committee referred has established a list of individuals and entities whose assets are to be frozen. These are supposed to be close associates and allies of former President of Liberia, Charles Taylor. According to Security Council Press Release SC / 8147 the Committee revised the list on 13th July 2004, to include Baba Jobe and Leonid Minin. According to the press release Leonid is an Israeli possessing 4 passports (Bolivia, German, Greek and Israeli). To put it in a nutshell what the resolution is saying is that all states in which the listed persons have assets shall freeze all such assets without delay. Are all assets of Baba Jobe frozen or is the state or some other persons using them? This is the big question that the state needs to answer. There is need for transparency on this matter. BAKOTEH WOMEN PROTEST AGAINST DUMP SITE By Surakata Danso On Friday 17th September 2004 the women of Bakoteh Housing Estate staged a peaceful protest march against the odd Bakoteh Dumpsite. The protesters, who were led by Madam Bajen Sanyang, started their march from Saffideen to KMC, Kanifing. They were chanting, “We are tired of the hazardous dumpsite, please help us now”. The women also chanted that they are tired of the smoke, foul odour, the mosquitoes, and the other harmful insects and creatures. Madam Sanyang assured the members of the press and the public that their action is motivated by the lack of concern by the KMC authorities. She noted that it is not only the lives of the elders, which are at, stake but also more seriously is the children of the settlement. Bajen finally indicated that on the 16th September 2004, when she led her group to the NEA headquarters, they were told that the NEA had provided KMC with the sum of 1.2 million Dollars, for the better management of the site. Mrs. Sanyang said that today KMC authorities are telling them that Gamworks has been paid since May 2004 to address the situation. When the press met with the Public Relations Officer (PRO) of the KMC, Pa Kalifa Sanyang he assured the press that KMC is equally concerned of the state of affairs of the site. Mr. Sanyang further added the council in collaboration with the NEA and Gamworks are doing everything possible to put the health hazard under control. When it was put to him that NEA had told the women that KMC is already given 1.2 million Dollars to address the situation, the PRO after consultation with his authorities indicated that the women must have misrepresented NEA. He added that as far as the council is concerned the said 1.2 million Dollars was earmarked for the Solid Waste Management Project for poverty alleviation. This, Pa Kalifa opined, is currently being managed by the Gamworks Agency; that the fund is to be used for fencing and developing a road inside the dumpsite for easy access and management. He added that at the moment KMC has been given a copy of o! nly the study report, while Gamworks is to facilitate the implementation of the project. The PRO also stressed that however the issue of Bakoteh Dumpsite is a national issue and not KMC alone; that this is why the actors are KMC, NEA, Gamworks and even BCC. On the issue of the 1.2 million Dollars the PRO denied that such an amount has been paid to KMC by the NEA. He left it to the press to find out who is right emphasizing that NEA never paid 50 cents to KMC. He asserted that a better and careful management of the dumpsite is that which in the best interest of KMC; KMC spends D100, 000 on a bulldozer every 5 days to clear the area. Finally on the issue of transferring the dumpsite to Tambana, a few kilometres from Brikama, the PRO opined that all he knows is that cabinet had discussed the transfer but could not say what is holding the implementation. NO FOOD FOR POLICE DETAINEES IN MANSA KONKO By Yaya Dampha Reports reaching FOROYAA intimated that the police detainees in the Mansa Konko Police Station are not having their meals as required. According to the sources, detainees’ food was being provided by individual police officers who are staying with their wives in their quarters. At the end of every month, the concerned police officers would make their claims to the officer commanding for approval and settlement, the report said. However, according to the same source, the amount allocated for the purpose of meals by the police authorities is only D1.50 (one dalasis fifty Bututs) per detainee daily, which it said is not even sufficient to buy a cup of rice. The source further stated that due to the meagre nature of this amount none of the police officers is ready to take the responsibility thus making the detainees to stay a whole day without food. When this reporter contacted the Officer Commanding (OC) Mansa Konko Division, Ebrima Cham he denied that this had ever happened. However, he confirmed that the amount for each detainee’s food is D1.50 daily. He said that it is one Sergeant Sallah who provides food for their detainees. He said every month Sallah will prepare his claims and that he will give approval for payment from the departmental warrant for feeding. He said it is since the time we attained independence that the equivalent of D1.50 per prisoner was catered for daily feeding. OC Cham also confirmed that that amount is meagre but he was quick to state that no officer had ever complained that to them. He said he had not also made any recommendation for an increase of this amount. Other Police Officers when contacted did confirm that at many times when they are on duty, they have witnessed detainees going the whole day without food. Will WAEC Pay Examiners? By Justin J.S Yusuf Information reaching FOROYAA indicate that the West African Examination Council WAEC has not been able to pay the examiners in the Gambia who marked this year’s Senior Secondary School Examination papers, since the exercise completed four weeks ago. According to a group of examiners who spoke to this reporter last Tuesday on condition of anonymity, indicated that some officials at the council have assured them during the examiners coordination meeting held on July 19, 2004 at the Gambia Senior Secondary School main hall, that their payments will be expedited immediately after the exercise. Complaining bitterly about WAEC, some examiners said that since all Senior Schools were made to pay for their candidates examination fees in full before sitting to their exams, the council should also be able to pay them after their exercise. “This is the second time WAEC is punishing us for efficiently doing our work for them. We sacrificed our holidays energy and time for pittance which they cannot pay while they always tell us that they cannot pay for the real value of the services we render to them. It is only to show their gratitude by refusing to pay us. This is a serious breach of contract,” complained one of the examiners. Another examiner who was also in a furious mood, emphasizes that if this will be the trend WAEC is going to deal with the examiners, then they will have to take their examination papers to Ghana, Nigeria or Sierra Leone for marking. “We are tired of them. This is really frustrating and they must note how difficult it was to get the required number of examiners to mark this year’s examination papers”, lamented the affected examiners. The examiners stated that some of them had to go and explain their personal problems to the accountant of WAEC who is believed to be controlling the affairs at the WAEC Banjul Office before being paid. One of the examiners revealed that even the chief examiners who had to travel to Ghana and Nigeria for the test standardization exercise, had to threaten them with boycott before being paid. He reiterated that WAEC made promises but fail to honour it. When contacted for comment, Mr. Njie, the head of WAEC in Banjul office said they will pay the examiners. “We are going to pay them, they are working under us but every year this is the way they act towards the council when it comes to paying them” he said. BABY THEFT REPORTED IN BUIBA – JARRA By Jobe Kebba & Yaya Dampha On Friday September 10th, 2004, this reporter had a brief stop in Jarra – Jappineh to visit a brother undergoing treatment with one Alhagie Njie, a grand marabout notable for curing mental illness. Upon arrival, it was disclosed that he, Mr. Njie has been contacted by the Soma Police to help them in their ongoing investigation in connection to a month old baby stolen from Buiba Imam Kunda. According to him, “A day before, I was visited by a middle aged lady, medium built and fair in complexion who gave her name as Mariama Jallow. She left a mobile number and claimed to be a resident of Serrekunda. This woman said she had a mentally sick relative, whom she intended bringing for treatment, which was the purpose of the visit.” Alhagie said he consented. “Following this, the woman gave me few Dalasis as charity and begged for prayers, which I did and she left,” he posited. “But to my surprise, I am just being contacted by the Police now enquiring as to whether I knew anything about this lady,” Alhagie concluded taking a deep breath of frustration. However, the story was confirmed by the Police as true and has identified and withheld three other people under their custody who are helping them in their investigation. These include two females and a male, whose mobile number was used by the lady in question. Besides, the Police report further indicated that the father of this one-month-old baby (Modou Lamin Ceesay) has told them this woman pretended to be a nurse at Soma Health Centre who visited the baby for a checkup. She was wearing an apron. She recommended that the child be taken to the Health Centre. When they got to Soma she took the baby from the mother and asked her to wait at the garage. That was the last time the mother ever saw her. It was through this the woman was able to snatch their only first born baby. The woman is still at large and it is therefore important for the whole Gambia to help the Police in their investigation in bringing this woman to justice. The Paul Commission Sitting of Tuesday 14th Sept. 2004 By Surakata Danso TESTIMONY OF RAYMOND SOCK, SOLICITOR GENERAL In his testimony before a three member commission led by High Court judge, Justice M. A. Paul, the Solicitor General, Mr. Raymond Sock who is also the head of the civil service the State Department for Justice and the Attorney General’s Chambers, told the commissioners that he had received and filled a form from the commission. When asked to inform the commission the positions he held from 22nd July 1994 to date, the Solicitor General opined that at the time of the July 22nd military takeover he was away until April 2000 when he returned; that following his return he was appointed Solicitor General and Legal Secretary up to date. Mr. Sock added that his career as Solicitor General was interrupted for a month. Mr. Sock in his testimony told the commission that he receives D8, 000 month. He also said that he has also served as a board member of AMRC, Judicial Service Commission and the Police Council; that he receives D500, D750 and D300 respectively per month. He further denied having any other source of income and that he does not hold brief for anybody in any business and he is not involved in any; that from 2000 when he was appointed he did not take any loan from the state nor any individual. On whether he has any bank account the Solicitor General indicated that his wife and himself are operating jointly a current and savings account at the Standard Chartered Bank. Mr. Sock said that the accounts are operated by his wife; that Madam Sock is a shareholder in Standard Chartered Bank. He further added that they also opened accounts for all their kids in the same bank; that since his appointment in 2000 he had made 11 overseas trips; that each time he goes he makes savings of 200 – 300 Dollars. On his assets Mr. Sock said apart from his current home, he has two plots; one in Sinchu Alhagie and one in Jamburr that are on customary tenure; that the Jamburr one which measures 40 m by 22 m is fenced with blocks at about D15 – 20, 000. For the school fees of his children Mr. Sock said he does not pay for them. The commission finally ordered him to produce within 10 days all statements of accounts of the joint bank accounts of himself and the wife, plus those of their children. He was also ordered to produce the lease documents and other relevant documents for their Jamburr and Sinchu Alhagie plots. TESTIMONY OF MR. SAKU MBOGE Also appearing the same day, 13th day of September 2004, was Mr. Saku Mboge. Mr. Mboge told the commission that since 1994, he had handled the following positions: Divisional Chief NIB July 1994 – September 1995, Chief Executive NIPA, Jan 1996; DPS Trade in December 1999, Permanent Secretary, Office of the President, January – June 2000 when he retired and then in 2001 – June 2003 Chief Executive, GIPFZA. For the salaries Mr. Mboge claimed that as Divisional Officer NIB he was paid D5, 000 and D500 a board member of IBAS; as CEO of NIPA he received D8, 000 and as Chairman of IBAS board D700; D3, 000 as the DPS Trade and D500 as IBAS board member; Kuntaur Rice Mill he said could not remember; D66, 444 per year he received as salary of PS, Office of the President and D500 as NAWEC board member and finally for GIPFZA he received D120, 000 per year plus D4, 000 responsibility and D250 residential allowances respectively. Mr. Mboge also indicated that he is right now receiving pension from both the Central Bank and GIPFZA but failed to say the amounts. On his assets Mr. Saku Mboge accepted having had two state allocations; one in Kanifing in 1984 where he is currently living and the second one in Kotu in 1992. He went further to inform the commission that he had sold the Kotu plot last July 2004 for D150, 000. On the utility of the proceeds, Mr. Mboge said that D100, 000 was spent to purchase a solar pumping machine and the D50, 000 went into the purchase of a Pajero for his own use. He finally claimed having an agricultural land of 12.5 hectares in Busumbala. He finally informed the commission that he was and is still banking with AGIB and Trust Bank. The commission before discharging him, ordered him to provide them within 10 days, all bank statements, leases of plots, the invoices and receipts for the purchase of the solar pumping machine and the transfer of the Pajero. The Janneh (GAMTEL) Commission Abdoulie G. Dibba SITTING OF THURSDAY 9TH SEPTEMBER 2004 Continuing her testimony on Thursday, Ms. Penda Dibba indicated that Mr. Hessling represented Siemens in the meeting of November 2002. She said Exhibit 7, which she is seeing now for the first time, is a letter written by Gamtel to Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd. She indicated that the reply of the letter was written by Mr. Mboob, which was a draft protest letter. She pointed out that she does not know when it was, but she had seen it before in his office and vetted it and after vetting it, she referred it to the Finance Director. She indicated that after vetting the protest letter, she was in agreement with its contents because she said, “We believed that the bond should not have been encashed in the first place.” Ms. Dibba pointed out that the guarantee for international financing was needed for the project pending legal advice. She argued that it was not a question of Gamtel accepting liability. She said the Global Expansion Project was won by Alcatel and it was Alcatel that was seeking for financing. She asserted that Alcatel did not get financing. Testifying further, Ms. Dibba indicated that she took her second trip for this particular saga from 4th to 7th of April 2003 and that when they arrived, they booked an appointment with a team of lawyers through the Ambassador and the council. She pointed out that they informed Siemens that they were looking for an embargo for the bond agreement because they (Siemens) introduced them (Gamtel) to Befag. Ms. Dibba indicated that they were contemplating two actions: a civil action against Siemens and Befag, and a criminal action against the officials of Befag. She pointed out that tickets, per diems and the 2001 project, which did not materialize, are all damages on the side of ! Gamtel but that suing Siemens and Befag does not mean that Gamtel lost the US $3 million. Ms. Dibba pointed out that at the moment, they are seeking legal advice as to who among the players were to take legal action against. She indicated that the reason why she does not report Befag to the German police was based on the fact that they have already engaged the services of lawyers who are responsible for this matter and that they (lawyers) know the laws of the area and the appropriate action to take. She indicated that they were informed by Mr. Becke subsequently that they have actually reported the matter to the state prosecution in Berlin. She argued that this was a result of a request they made to Mr. Becke. At this stage, Ms. Dibba was asked to look at item 7 of Exhibit 9. After looking at it she acknowledged that approval was also sought from the Office of the President to engage in dialogue with Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd for a long term loan to recover the US$3 million as their credit rating was affected. She pointed out that she does not know whether the reputation of Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd was equally at stake over this matter. She indicated that their legal unit issued a legal opinion on the liability of Gamtel, which was conveyed, to the Board. She pointed that she is not aware of any written document in this regard. Asked by Counsel Sissoho whether she could recall how the board was informed of that legal opinion regarding the Gamtel liability, Ms. Dibba indicated that the Chairman of the Board was informed in a meeting and that in every Board meeting, the Befag issue was raised and opinion given whether legal or financial. At this stage, Ms. Ida Drammeh took the floor and indicated the following: “Is it correct, is it not that before Exhibit 2 was signed, there were several meetings between Gamtel and Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd to reach agreement on the text of Exhibit 2 i.e. the bond agreement?” In response, Ms. Dibba indicated that she is not aware of any meeting. She pointed out that she knew that she vetted the bank facility and sent it to the Financial Director and that she had one or two agreements with Mr. Bernard Mendy on phone. Ms. Drammeh again asked whether Ms. Dibba saw anything in Exhibit 6, which should have permitted Standard Chartered Bank London to refuse to honour this obligation? In response, Ms. Dibba indicated that looking on the face of Exhibit 6 alone, she will say no. Continuing her testimony, Ms. Dibba that if the text of Exhibit 6 was brought to her before signature, she would have advised Gamtel that the text be referred to the Befag agreement and that the text would be a conditional guarantee. She indicated that she would also advise that Gamtel be notified on presentation of the guarantee and that payment of the grant financing after the grace period would render the bond guarantee effective. Ms. Dibba pointed out that she did not know why the text of the bank guarantee was not submitted to her for legal opinion before being issued and that she did not ask because she was not a party. So therefore it wasn’t an issue she said. Ms. Dibba pointed out that her opinion is that the lawyers have already made a case against Siemens and Befag. Ms. Dibba acknowledged that under the financing agreement Befag has not done anything to be entitled to the US $3million. She indicated that the only time that Befag could be entitled to the US $3 million referred to in section 4 of Exhibit 1 was if Gamtel was in breach of its obligations on Exhibit 1. Ms. Dibba acknowledged that if she knew that Gamtel was entering into agreement with Befag, she would advise Gamtel to exercise more diligence on how the execution was carried out. At this stage, Mr. Chric E. Mene took the floor. In responding to a question raised by Mr. Mene, Ms. Dibba acknowledged that Exhibit 4 is an embodiment of several different things and that she does not know who compiled them. Ms. Dibba pointed out that the protocol dated 27th of June 2002 was signed by Mr. Abdourahman Mboob and that it was in relation to the effective date of the contract that was already signed. She also pointed out that the signatures of the contract were Dr. Bakary Njie, Phoday Ceesay Finance Director, Mr. O. B. Hessling and Verooka Everle. She indicated that it was signed in Banjul on the 14th of December 2001 according to the document. Continuing her testimony, Ms. Dibba acknowledged that Exhibit 16 is the contract between Siemens and Gamtel and that it was signed on the same day as Exhibit 4 of 1 of 1 to 30 of 30 according to the document. She acknowledged that the contract section contained in Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 16 are one and the same except that other documents from elsewhere that have been added. Ms. Dibba pointed out that the letter dated on the 15th of October 2002 written by Gamtel to Befag, was done by her on behalf of Gamtel. She acknowledged that the letter dated 10th March 2003 was signed by her requesting the Ambassador of Brussels to use his good office in relation to the saga. She also po! inted out that she saw the letter dated 14th April 2003 and the annex letter. She indicated that the first letter is informing Mr. Phoday Ceesay, Finance Director that a copy of his letter is sent to the Ambassador of Brussels together with the memorandum and that the second letter is from Mr. Becke to the Ambassador of Brussels. Continuing her testimony, Ms. Dibba indicated that Exhibit 64 is a bill in request of legal action for the lawyers in Germany and that Exhibit 65 is a power of attorney signed by the Director of Gamtel at the time, Mr. Abdourahman Mboob to enable legal action to proceed in Germany. She pointed out that she recognized the signature on Exhibit 33, which is the signature of Lamin Jabbi. She indicated that Exhibit 33 is a memorandum forwarding Exhibit 2 to the Managing Director, Mr. Mboob recommending him to sign it. She indicated that it is usual for Gamtel to have documents involving serious legal complication being signed without seeking legal advice. She argued that that is always there since her employment with Gamtel. Ms. Dibba pointed out that after the Befag contract agreement, the Board resolved in one of their meetings that for any contract that Gamtel is going in for, the contract must be signed b! y the Managing Director and the Secretary of the Board. She acknowledged writing a report which was copied to the external auditors, the Managing Director Dr. Bakary Njie and all the other Directors of Gamtel got a copy of the report. She pointed out that the Managing Director, Dr. Njie was not happy with the report and indicated that he should sign it before it is issued to the external auditors, which according to him was not done. Ms. Dibba indicated that among the present management who were Directors at the time are: the Finance Director Phoday Ceesay, the Managing Director Omar Ndow and Mr. William who is currently the Director of Human Resources. In responding to a question raised by Mr. Sissoho, Ms. Dibba pointed out that she knew what amendments are and that amendments are made and made when eventually signed, they become part of the document. At this stage, she was shown the amendment of the contract agreement 2002 and asked whether she recognized the signature under Gamtel. In response, Ms. Dibba indicated that the signature under Gamtel is a distorted signature and underneath the signature looks like a photocopy being pasted. She acknowledged that all pages of Exhibit 4 are signed. She indicated that her opinion on Exhibit 5a, the bond agreement is that it should have been conditional. Concluding her testimony, Ms. Dibba indicated that she does not know whether the personnel in Standard Chartered Bank were in a position or not to advise Gamtel on the legal implication in Exhibit 6 and that as she indicated in her evidence-in-chief, Standard Chartered Bank should not have paid for the encashment of the bond guarantee. FOCUS ON CEDAW The Initial, Second and Third Reports Amie Sillah Reporting Article 11 Equality In The Field Of Employment This article deals with women’s equal rights in employment. It also deals with necessary measures to eliminate discrimination in employment on the basis of marriage or maternity and a periodic review of labour legislation. It provides thus: 1. “Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of employment in order to ensure, on the basis of equality of men and women, the same rights, in particular a) The right to work as an inalienable right of all human beings; b) The right to the same employment opportunities, including the application of the same criteria for selection in matters of employment; c) The right to free choice of profession and employment, the right to promotion, job security and all benefits and conditions of service and the right to receive vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeship, advanced vocational training and recurrent training; d) The right to equal remuneration, including benefits, and of equal treatment in respect of work of equal value, as well as equality of treatment in the evaluation of the quality of work; e) The right to social security, particularly in cases of retirement, unemployment, sickness, invalidity and old age and other incapacity to work, as well as the right to paid leaves; f) The right to protection of health and to safety in working conditions, including the safeguarding of the function of reproduction; 2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on the grounds of marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, state parties shall take appropriate measures: a) To prohibit, subject to the imposition of sanctions, dismissals on the grounds of pregnancy or of maternity leave and discrimination in dismissals on the basis of marital status; b) To introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social benefits without loss of former employment, seniority or social allowances; c) To encourage the provision of necessary supporting social services to enable parents to combine family obligations with work responsibilities and participation in public life, in particular through promoting the establishment and development of a network of child-care facilities; d) To provide special protection to women during pregnancy in types of work proved to be harmful to them. Protective legislation relating to matters covered in this article shall be reviewed periodically in the light of scientific and technological knowledge and shall be revised, repealed or extended as necessary.” This is also another area where even though the law does not discriminate; however, discrimination is experienced in practice. The Public Service Commission is responsible for appointments, promotions, transfers and disciplinary action of public officers. The P.S.C. Regulations and the General Orders under which the Commission operates do not contain any expressed discriminatory provision. Yet still women’s access to employment is limited, in terms of getting employed in the first place, staying in employment and making it to the top. The population data bank shows that women occupy 12.8% of managerial positions, 13.9% of the professional and technical, 26.3% of the clerical, 9.4% of the skilled labour force, and 61.9% of the unskilled labour category. Access to employment is determined by qualification, experience and availability. Due to a multitude of factors, women have not been able to compete with ! men in meeting these conditions. These include low educational levels leading to lesser qualifications, absence of special measures or affirmative action policies in training institutions or in the work place, the dual career role of women i.e. child care and family responsibilities together with work responsibilities. In The Gambia women are entitled to maternity leave. The General Orders and the Labour Act provided that a woman is entitled to six weeks leave before giving birth and another six weeks leave after giving birth. It is also provided that women are entitled to their salaries and benefits during these periods. However, women who are not in permanent employment (those who fall in the category of daily wage earners) are not entitled to maternity leave. In addition, there have been several complaints that the six weeks leave after birth is far too short. This short period forces mothers to go back to work at a time when their babies most need their attention. This means that babies will have to be left in the hands of nannies, (who in most cases are too young and inexperienced to take proper care of babies), who may be negligent in their duties. There have been several campaigns by women to have this period extended so as to enable them to take care of their children. It is also important to note that men are not entitled to paternity leave. This is a manifest indication of the attitude of Gambian society i.e., it is the responsibil! ity of the mother to take care of the children and babies. Thus women are usually burdened by both their household chores and official duties without any assistance from their men. The idea of childcare support system does not exist in the Gambia, women and men are however, entitled to the same retirement and pension benefits. They are also entitled to the same Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation Act. In conclusion, while women are making significant strides, they still have several factors that militate against their access, retention and upward mobility. Attrition rates are still high due to childcare and family responsibilities and negative socio-cultural biases. Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. -- Chi Jaama Joe Sambou ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l To 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://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~