Issue No. 69/2004, 30th August - 1st September 2004 EDITORIAL THE INTEGRITY OF THE STATE IS AT STAKE!! JAMMEH MUST ACT There are decent governments and decent opposition parties. There are also rogue governments and rogue opposition parties. Decent governments run states on the basis of decent laws. They allow public administration to be conducted on the basis of public interest and individual merit. They maintain armed, security and law enforcement forces, which are loyal to the people and could serve under any government put into office by the people. Decent governments open up the state media to divergent views and promotes a culture of accountability and transparency in public administration. A rogue government will operate like a political mafia. Power becomes personalized. Cliques develop in public administration where offices are occupied on the basis of personal loyalties rather than merit. Law becomes irrelevant. Might or impunity becomes institutionalized. Fear and coercion become weapons to promote submission to the rulers. Armies and security and police forces develop cliques who assume powers beyond that accorded by rank. These cliques are given autonomy to act to suppress any descent within or outside of the forces. Such people can perform atrocities of all dimensions with impunity. Decent Opposition Parties are those which aim to promote Nationalism in the face of the onslaught of an indecent government, give confidence to the people and assure them of the building of a country based on democratic norms and a government that is sensitive to all the reasonable and just demands of the citizenry. Such parties would give hope of the emergence of a future that will not lead to victimization but would safeguard the interest of the citizenry and do justice to all. A rogue opposition is one, which seeks to remove a government only to establish all the conditions that makes a government to be apt to be described as a rogue government. It is important to emphasize that any government, which maintains a private or secret force outside the ambit of the law, is a rogue government. Such a government can earn no respect and members of such secret armies end up being tried as war criminals. Leaders of rogue governments become pariah in the world who ends up receiving commands to seek asylum elsewhere like the Menghistus of Ethiopia and Charles Taylor of Liberia and so on. Jammeh must take the arson attacks against the media seriously. Immediate action must be taken to come to the truth. This truth should be known to all. If this fails to happen his government will qualify to be classified as a rogue government. The end result is incalculable. All those who are linked to the government should engage in a serious debate on the arson attack and come up with a credible way forward. The issue is not about Hamat Bah’s parliamentary immunity. The issue is about the Arson attacks and the need to conduct genuine investigation to come to the truth. We also hope that The Independent will call a meeting with other media houses to give them all the facts in their possession. We hope Hamat will also meet all the political figures to give them all the facts in his possession. This matter requires concerted effort. None should panic. All decent Gambians should act in unison to nip this in the bud and save our country from sinking into a pariah state where might becomes right until the law of the jungle breeds a state of ungovernability and statelessness just like what Sierra Leone and Liberia were. Jammeh must act now to save the situation. The whole nation have their eyes open to see what will happen next. Silence is unacceptable at this juncture. Words are meaningless. It is action that should speak the clear language that decent people in the Gambia and the world can have confidence in. The Independent’s Case ”It is a case for the military police and the Commander-in-Chief” Halifa Sallah In this interview, Halifa Sallah speaks on the allegations by Hamat Bah and The Independent and how the government stands at the moment in relation to the Alliance/Coalition. Speaking to FOROYAA on the allegation that Corporal Sanna Sanyang and Corporal Sheriff Guissey were among the arsonists who destroyed the printing press of The Independent, Halifa Sallah said that he was at first concerned when he heard the allegations from Hamat. He added: ”National Assembly members have parliamentary immunity regarding what they say but if our information is not credible we can equally be taken to task in the press. When we make allegations against citizens in the press they can equally counter our allegations and call us liars in the press. This is why the immunity is not a licence to tell lies since our integrity can also be called into question if we do not speak the truth. FOROYAA: How did you react afterwards? Halifa: I made enquiries from Sam Sarr whether the journalists had raised the allegations at their meeting with the National Security Council. As far as I was concerned, the allegations made the case to be for the military police and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Gambia is known to be maintaining a respectable national army, which is taking part in peacekeeping missions. If their allegations of hooliganism and banditry which are against the Armed Forces Act are true, then immediate action must be taken by the armed forces to clear its record either by capturing and isolating all the culprits or proving beyond doubt that the allegations are unfounded. FOROYAA: How do you see the developments so far? Halifa: It is remarkable to read statements of the editors of The Independent and hear the weak response to Hamat Bah’s allegations. The issue is not about exploiting parliamentary immunity. Hamat made a statement. It is for the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces to put his own investigating machinery in motion to come up with a credible statement to confirm or counter what Hamat Bah had said. As for the editors of The Independent, I must congratulate the editors for their strength. Many would have been frightened to seek asylum elsewhere if they had the information they have lived with for months. Now that they have decided to share their experience, the media fraternity should appeal for a second meeting with the National Security Council. The Council should advise the president to either get the military police to take up the matter with speed or set up a commission of inquiry so that all those against whom allegations are made and their accusers could testify. FOROYAA: How should the citizens behave in the face of such uncertainty? Halifa: I have always said that terrorists become more powerful if they succeed in creating a climate of fear and alarm. Those who use such tactics expect to frighten the citizenry into submission. People must see these terrorists as an undignified and unenlightened few who accept to be the running dogs of their fellow human being. No dignified and conscious Gambian would accept to bark and bite for the pleasure of their fellow Gambian. We must isolate the few and wage a campaign against them in order to restore sanity. There are decent and indecent people in all sectors. We must encourage the decent people in our security forces and make them prevail against the wicked. Such people should know that they would prosper on the basis of merit under any government, which rewards merit instead of impunity. Governments which reward impunity and those who become willing agents have no future. In my view, the more Jammeh ignores such impunity, the more he pushes decent Gambians who want a decent society into the camp of the Alliance/Coalition. The country is standing between despair and hope. If people are convinced that Jammeh’s government can only bring despair they should also bear in mind that the Alliance/Coalition can give hope. There is therefore no room for despair. FOROYAA: How do you see the National Assembly? Halifa: The lesson is clear to all that if we had no opposition in the National Assembly there are many exposures that would have been hidden under the carpet. I would like to give a comprehensive review of our last meeting. Note: See next issue for such a review under the heading, ”The Controversial Developments in the National Assembly.” NO UN VISITORS FOR BABA K. JOBE According to eye witnesses between 3 to 4 PM on Saturday 21st August a state guard by the name Ousman Babou was beaten by a mob in Fajikunda Layout. The State Guard was then reportedly carrying a fully loaded AK 47 rifle. According to reports the state guard entered the compound insulting and uttering the words, ”Come out, I will kill you.” He is reported to have told one Buba a resident of that home that he had come to kill him because of what he did to his boy, Ansumana. The reports continued to say that Buba then replied by saying ”You can shoot me”. At this point a crowd emerged. They grabbed the rifle and seized it from him and beat him up. They then proceeded to take him to Bundung Police Station but found some military officers at the Latrikunda Petrol Station to whom the beaten soldier was handed. The officers are reported to have taken him to Yundum Barracks. This reporter got in touch with Buba Badjie who confirmed narration. He claimed that earlier on three of them namely Ousman Babou, Ansumana Drammeh and Sergeant Salif Jawo came to Buba Badjie’s home. He went on to say that the three claimed they were sent by a Senior Officer from Bakau Barracks to search Buba’s house for drugs. According to Buba the search was conducted and no drugs were found. He added that they misbehaved themselves and then left due to the pressure of a crowd that had gathered. He said further stated that Ansumana came back alone with a dagger pointing out that he had come to revenge. After the pressure of the crowd he left. However, Ousman Babou soon returned with an AK 47 rifle fully loaded and putting on uniform. Then followed the incident as stated earlier. PURPORTED TORTURE VICTIM ON TRIAL Seedy Fanneh a resident of Brikama Madina who had complained of torture by the Police at Brikama Police Station on Monday 23rd August 2004 appeared before the Magistrate Court in Brikama Western Division. But the Court Clerk told him that his case would be heard the following day, as the case was not registered for hearing. On Tuesday 24th when the case was mentioned by First Class 1617 representing the I.G.P in court read the charges against the accused as follows: - 1. Causing a Breach Of The Peace on the 1st July 2004 the accused was walking along the Brikama Serekunda Highway conducting himself in a manner that can cause the breaking of the peace and the stability of the state. He said Seedy was heard insulting the President of the Republic that he is foolish and senseless. The second charge was that the accused unlawfully escaped from lawful custody while under custody at the Brikama Police Station. When the accused, Seedy Fanneh was called by the Magistrate Bubacarr Jawo to answer to the charges. He pleaded not guilty to both counts. Inspector Jawo Testifies In giving his evidence to the courts Omar Jawo Chief Inspector and also the Station Officer at Brikama Police Station told the court that 1st July 2004 at about 12 mid night he was sitting just outside the gate of the station, just in front with one Corporal 1496 Bojang together with one lady Ndeye Fatou Demba where he saw the accused coming from the market towards the Police Station shouting and insulting President Jammeh saying he is a foolish and senseless man and that the by election in Jarra is a lesson for the President. The witness added that he said Fanneh was saying this he entered the Police Station and passed him with Corporal 1496 Bojang and asked for the Police. ”Where are the Police?” Fanneh asked them according to the witness. He said Fanneh added: ”Who ever talks among you I will cut out your penis”. As the Station officer I have to order for his arrest, which was done by Corporal 1496 Bojang. Jawo went on to say that after his arrest he was charged for the particulars of offence.” According to Jawo the accused was later granted bail. He said on the 9th July 2004 ”I ordered him to be charged for not coming to report for 3-4 days.” The accused he said escaped and ran away for two days. The Station Officer said he also gave his statement to the Police. For his part when asked by the court whether he had heard all what the Inspector had said he answered in the positive and said he did not accept all what he said. But he told the court that he has a lawyer by the name Ousainou Darboe who could not appear in court because the Police have been giving him dates, which were not honoured. He said he did not inform his lawyer, as he was not told that the case would be mentioned that day. At this point the Magistrate said that it is his constitutional right to have a counsel and the case was adjourned till the 13th September 2004. He was asked to try and inform his counsel. The accused was also granted bail in the sum of D5000.00 with a Gambian surety. The Paul Commission The Paul commission entered its second face of enquiry of probing into the assets of civil servants and other public officers from July 1994 to date. It could be recalled that the commission started its activities with the Ministers or SoS’s under the ARPRC and APRC on Monday 19th July, and on the 24th of August 2004, the commission started to call Permanent Secretaries of different state departments of state. The first PS to be called was Abdourahman Cole of the Interior and on the 25th was the turn of Bai Ousman Secka currently at Defence and Saidou Sinay Jallow currently at Works & Infrastructure. Evidence of Bai Ousman Secka The witness said his names are Bai Ousman Secka living at Old Jeshwang in the KMC; that he is the current PS of Defence. He confirmed receiving a declaration form from the commission, which he had filled and returned to the commission. He was shown the form, which he confirmed, and when tendered, it was marked Ext A. Mr. Secka then went on to give a break down of the various positions he had held from 1994 to date. He said he had been DPS Tourism from 1994 - 1995, 1995-1996 DPS Foreign Affairs, 96-98 PS Foreign Affairs, 98-2000 Commissioner LRD, 2000-2001 PS Tourism, 2001-2003 Ambassador Senegal with accreditations to Mali, Mauritania, Guinea Conakry, etc, 2003-2004 PS Tourism and Culture on his return and 2004 March to date PS Health. On whether he can furnish the commission with his salaries for the various posts he had held from 1994, Mr. Secka said he had not got with him the appointment letters, but that currently his earning are D8,091. On what he had been receiving as DPS Tourism onwards, Mr. Secka said he cannot remember, but that as DPS it was grade 11 and PS is grade 12; that as Ambassador in Senegal he was receiving D13,000. He denied bringing any foreign exchange on his return from Senegal as Ambassador; that he is not involved in any gainful business and does not hold brief for anyone’s business. He further said he did not have any loan from the government nor any individual. Mr. Secka then confirmed having made several overseas trips and that he sometimes makes savings out of his per diem on return. He said those savings are later spent on general family expenses e.g. building, etc. The state counsel Fagbenle then asked him if he is engaged in building at the moment, which Secka confirmed. On where he is living at Old Jeshwang Mr. Secka said he is renting since his own house, which he is building in 1995, is not ready 1995. Further on the total he had received as per diem from 1994 to date, the witness asked for 7 days to enable him get the facts from the various departments of state. The permission was granted but was told that he needed to apply through the commission. Bai Ousman however denied an allegation made by the former SoS for Tourism and culture Yankuba Touray that he had discussed the issue of Edmundo restaurant. He also denied ever surcharging anybody for a mismanaged fund; he confirmed being a member of the GTA and that it is the board of the GTA that has the powers to allocate land in TDA. He however was quick to add that the SoS has the veto power in any decision of the board. Mr. Secka denied having any knowledge of 90 pounds mentioned by the counsel. On the diverting of the monthly expenses of the GTA Mr. Secka said he was not in office at the time; that when he came in, one thing that was clear was that the funds were directed wrongly by somebody. The witness and the state counsel continued to talk in paradox without mentioning any names. For the media to know the real issue, Mr. Secka denied ever being aware of any irregular transfer of funds from GTA accounts. On whether his wife is engaged in any business, the witness replied that the wife had inherited business from her mother. He agreed that his wife was in business well before 1994; that she contributes in all-family expenses, but he denied paying any money into the wife’s account nor does she have any dealings with his account. He further said that she banks with the standard bank and he banks with the trust bank since 1994. The commission then ordered that Mr. Secka to supply the commission with all the bank statements of himself, the wife and all expenses on their children’s education. Evidence Of Mr. Saidou Sinay Jallow The witness gave his name as Saidou Sinay Jallow living in Banjulinding and that by the 1994 take over he was out of the country; that on his return in 1995 he went back to the Gambia College up to 1998, when he became Director of Tertiary Education at the department of education up to 2001. He confirmed receiving a form from the commission, which he had filled and returned. The form was tendered and marked Ext. A. Mr. Jallow then went on to say that he became PS Tourism 2001 - 2003 and 2004 PS at works. On his earnings while he was director tertiary education, Mr. Jallow said he was receiving a total of D16800 as his salary and cost of his consultancies for St. Mary’s University of Halifax. For his salary as PS he said he received D8000 - D9000 monthly. When asked if that includes allowances when he was at Tourism, Mr. Jallow replied that as PS Tourism he was receiving allowance such as 1000 pounds quarterly as board member of the Senegambia Hotel and that he was also paid D1000 as GTA board member. For his overseas travel per diem, Mr. Jallow submitted a list of the hotels for the trips and the sum involved. But the commission did not disclose the amount. He further disclosed that he had made a total savings of D700,000 some part of which was spent on his house and personal family expenses. He also said he spent D300,000 on his Banjulinding house which if valued can cost D500,000. Mr. Jallow accepted having a state allocation only once at the Bijilo Layout but denied having any Agricultural land. He disclosed that he had and is banking with the Trust Bank and Standard Chartered Banks; that he does not have any private car, no foreign bank account and no shares in any business. Towards the close of his evidence Mr. Jallow also disclosed that he does not hold for himself or for anybody any gainful business nor did anybody hold brief for him. He denied even taking part in the implementation of any education project. The commission finally told the witness that it could be recalled he was also ordered to supply the commission on the up date of his children’s educational expenses and bank statements from 1998 to date. FOCUS ON CEDAW Continuation Article 7 - Participation in Public and Political Life At the grassroots level, the political status and participation of women is still low. In the history of The Gambia, there has never been a Female Divisional Commissioner (Administrative Head). To date, there is no Female Chief (Head of an Administrative District), due to the patriarchal nature of the Gambian society and the traditional belief that only men are capable of leading. The implication of this is that the views of women, who constitute over fifty percent of the national population, are not heard at the grassroots decision-making level. At the village level there are five village heads (Alkalo), this number though few, is indeed a significant development. Hitherto it was virtually impossible to have a female village head, as the eldest male has always been favoured as opposed to the eldest female. With regard to economic and employment opportunities there are no express laws or policies which hinder the access of women to job opportunities. However, statistics reveal a bias in favour of men, especially in the Formal Sector. This is a direct result of the low level of education among a majority of Gambian women. The cultural perception, especially among rural communities, is that a good woman marries and bears children and therefore has no business with education. This has resulted in unequal opportunities in education. Though policies have been adopted to correct this imbalance women are still disadvantaged, for example, there were 13,345 employees n the civil service as at February 1997, but only 21% were females. According to the 1994 Employment and Remuneration survey, in the formal private sector, conducted by the Central Statistics Department, less than 32 percent of the formal private sector employees were females. The females are concentrated in the agricultural (5 percent), community, social and personal services (16 percent) and hotels and restaurants (15 percent) sub sectors. Over 75 percent of employees in the formal private agricultural subsector are females. This notwithstanding, 83 percent of managerial and administrative positions are hold by males, 79 percent of uninstalled employees are females. Various factors act as stumbling block in the upward mobility of women on the employment ladder. Demands of child and family care, parental and marital obligations are some of the factors that reduce a woman’s flexibility in pursuing further long-term training. As a result, most women lack the relevant qualifications for rising to higher positions. However, despite the unfavourable statistics, in recent years the number of women who have ascended to the higher echelons of management and executive positions have increased. There is a number of women who are heads of institutions and several NGO bodies to name of few. - The Permanent Secretary Office of the Vice President is a woman; - The Director General of the Management Development Institute is a woman; - The Executive Director Women’s Bureau is a woman; - The Chief Executive at the Royal Victoria Teaching Hospital and - The Accountant General Article 8 - International Representation and Participation of Women This article seeks to ensure that women are accorded equal opportunity with men in the area of Diplomacy and International Relation. It provides thus: ”State parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure to women, on equal terms with men without any discrimination, the opportunity to represent their Governments at the International level and to participate in the work of international organizations.” Presently, the participation of women at diplomatic and international positions is very low. Out of the twelve ambassadorial positions there is no female ambassador and only three consulars. Generally therefore, there is no discrimination de jure, but de facto women are discriminated upon. Moreover, due to family commitments married women have found it difficult to accept diplomatic positions abroad. In the Gambia it is more common for a man to travel abroad on diplomatic posting with his wife and family, than a woman doing the same. This factor is therefore another obstacle to the advancement of women in diplomatic and international appointments. Article 9 - Nationality This article has two basic ideas. The first idea is that women, on an equal footing with men, shall have the right to acquire, change or retain their nationality, and that marriage or a change in the husband’s nationality during marriage shall not automatically affect the woman’s nationality. The second idea is that women shall have the same rights as men with regard to the nationality. The article provides thus: 1. ”States parties shall grant women equal rights with men to acquire, change or retain their nationality. They shall ensure in particular that neither marriage to an alien not change of nationality by the husband during marriage shall automatically change the nationality of the wife, render her stateless or force upon her the nationality of the husband. 2. State parties shall grant women equal rights with men with respect to the nationality of their children. Chapter II of the 1970 Republican Constitution of The Gambia, provided for qualification for citizenship of The Gambia. According to Section 3 of the 1970 Constitution, Citizenship of The Gambia could be attained either by birth or descent. The provisions of the Section relates to either parent. Therefore appeared that women have equal rights with their husbands in relation to the nationality of their children. But going by the provisions of Section 6 it is obvious that this is only available where the child is born in The Gambia. The Section provides thus: ”A person born outside The Gambia after 17th February 1965 shall become a citizen of The Gambia at the date of his birth if; at that date, his father is a citizen of The Gambia.” The provision meant that the acquisition of citizenship by children born outside The Gambia was dependent on the nationality of their fathers. Thus a Gambian woman who has a child born outside The Gambia with a non- Gambian cannot give her nationality to the child. This provision was grossly discriminatory against women. The only thing that could be done was to register that child as a citizen of The Gambia under section 4 (1) of The Nationality and Citizenship Act. The acquisition of citizenship by non-Gambian spouses is also discriminatory. Here the only option available to a woman who marries a non-Gambian is to adopt the man’s citizenship, which means that she will be deprived of her citizenship (Section 10). However, the corresponding provision in the 1997 Constitution, which is Chapter III (Citizenship), has made considerable improvement on the status of women. In particular Section 10 provides that ”A person born outside The Gambia after the coming into force of this constitution shall be a citizen of The Gambia by descent if at the time of his/her birth either his/her parents is a citizen of The Gambia otherwise than by virtue of this section or any comparable provision of any earlier constitution.” The provision is indeed a departure from the provision of Section 6 of the 1970 Constitution, which only accorded, citizenship to a child born outside The Gambia if that child’s father (and not mother) was a citizen of The Gambia. This provision could therefore be considered as a useful measure in the drive towards according equal rights and privileges to both men and women. Section 10 of the 1997 Constitution is indeed an innovation. It has accorded women a right, which many had been clamouring for ages. This provision is therefore a brilliant example of a good practice vis-Ã -vis the CEDAW Convention. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~