Good Morning Mr. Sidibeh, i totally agree with you that these negotiations should have been keept secret to the end and the UDP/NRP Alliance believe the same but it is on the contrary for NADD. The first correspondence between UDP/NADD Alliance and NADD was published by FOROYAA NEWSPAPER on their Issue NO. 61/2006, 4-6 August, 2006 then the online newspapers pick it from there. See below the following FOROYAA NEWSPAPER publication, then you will be able to tell who first lick the correspondences on the internet. Please, it is your role to advice your party. Thanks. Saihou Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue Issue No.64/2006, 11-13 August, 2006 Editorial ANOTHER EVIDENCE OF IEC’S DISREGARD OF THE CONSTITUTION IN DETERMINING THE DATE FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Section 43(1)(d) states that subject to the provisions of the constitution the Independent Electoral Commission shall be responsible for ensuring that the dates, times and places of public elections and referenda are determined in accordance with law and that they are publicized and elections held accordingly. This means that a competent Independent Electoral Commission should know the letter and spirit of the Constitution and should perform their duties in line with its provisions. FOROYAA has always maintained that September 22 falls short of the constitutional requirements to hold a presidential election. The most glaring confirmation of FOROYAA’s view is the Bill published to amend the Constitution which was also amended in 2001. Section 63(2) states that “The person elected President shall assume office sixty days following the day of his or her election…” Needless to say, since the term of office of a President lasts for five years President Jammeh’s term ends on 18th December 2006. If the president elected on 22nd September is to assume office under the Constitution he/she would have to do so on 22nd November 2006, a month before the end of term of office of the President. This is why the state is trying to amend section 63(2). In the object of the amendment the Executive states that the Bill seeks to amend section 63(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia, which duly restricts the date for a presidential election by providing that an elected president shall assume office sixty days following the day of his or her election.” The implication of that provision is that the election must be fixed on a particular day that satisfies both the sixty days requirement and the expiration of the term of office of the President.” These are the very words of the Executive. It is clear to them that to meet the constitutional requirement the election must take place two months before the expiration of the term of office of the President. Why did the IEC put the date to 22 September 2006? We hope the IEC will now review all the decisions they have taken, engage the Inter-Party Committee in discussion and seek proper legal advice in determining new dates for elections. In our view to leave an incumbent to stay in office for three months after he/she has lost an election does not make democratic sense. What is logical is to hold elections two days before the expiration of the term of office of the incumbent so that whoever wins an election will assume office the following day after the announcement of the results. The constitutional amendments should have been geared towards such a development. NADD AND UDP/NRP VIEWS ON UNITY NADD Executive Secretary Dear Colleague, Your letter ref. NADD/FA/02/02/06 of 6th August 2006 refers. The joint Executive Committee of the UDP/NRP respects NADD’s decision to reject the proposals emanating from it. The UDP/NRP Alliance wishes to draw NADD’s attention to the fact that legally UDP/NRP cannot be part or members of NADD. The NADD Executive seems to be ignoring the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sallah and others Vs. The Clerk of the National Assembly and others. The suggestion that UDP/NRP Alliance is to state categorically whether it is willing to join NADD is a suggestion that fails to recognize the legal position that parties cannot form or be members of political parties. Although Mr. Hamat Bah and Mr. Ousainu Darboe and indeed any other Gambian is free and entitle to join NADD the political party under whose umbrella you propose to sponsor candidates for any election the reality of the matter is that neither Mr. Bah nor Mr. Darboe is willing to resign their membership of their parties to rejoin NADD. The leadership of the UDP/NRP Alliance is very conversant with the laws of The Gambia and in particular laws regulating and governing election matters. Probably if the views of some people who are part of the UDP/NRP Alliance were heeded the legal and constitutional mess created by the registration of NADD would have been averted. The UDP/NRP Alliance is not seeking and has never sought power for its sake. It is an Alliance that is genuinely committed to the amelioration of the worsening conditions in all aspects in The Gambia. Finally I regard your rejection, without any discussion, of our proposal as a rejection of our invitation to meet and discuss and this we accept in good faith. Yours in the service of the truth. A.N.M. OUSAINU DARBOE (For UDP/NR.P Alliance) NADD’S RESPONSE Dear Mr. Darboe, ON THE CONTENTIOUS ISSUES RAISED IN YOUR LETTER Your memorandum of 7th July has been received. The Executive Committee of NADD respects your decision not to be part of the NADD compact. Of course NADD cannot be part of the expanded UDP/NRP Alliance since the two parties were part and parcel of NADD’s political arrangement. However, the Executive Committee of NADD was very much disappointed that you proceeded to indicate in no uncertain terms that the Supreme Court case Sallah vs the Clerk of the National Assembly and others has barred the UDP/NRP alliance from stating categorically its terms and conditions for re-engaging NADD. The Executive Committee will convey its rejection of your political interpretation of the Supreme Court decision and its immense revulsion for your description of the greatest demonstration of political will by the opposition by registering NADD as an umbrella party, as a legal and constitutional mess. I decided to seek authorization from the Executive Committee to address such issues with greater clarity since you claim that the registration of NADD was against your advice. Mr. Darboe, even though I, Halifa Sallah, was not around when the NADD Executive Committee sent papers to IEC for registration of NADD, even though as Minority Leader in the National Assembly and member of the Pan-African parliament I had more to lose in terms of post than any member of NADD when our seats were declared vacant, even though there had not been the slightest indication that I will be made flag-bearer before the court decision, I did not hesitate to tell the whole world that the registration of NADD was a blessing in disguise. The reason for this is simple. It is incontrovertible that once the MOU was signed by the representatives of all the political parties to establish NADD its registration became mandatory in order to give relevance to its letter and spirit. Let me refer you to the MOU to buttress my point. Article 16 of the MOU states that “The Alliance shall have an emblem, colour, motto and symbol to be determined within one month of the coming into force of the agreement with the full participation of its supporters and sympathizers.” Suffice it to say that Article 8 also adds that “The selection of the candidate of the Alliance for presidential, National Assembly and council elections shall be done by consensus, provided that in the event of an impasse selection shall be done by holding a primary election restricted to party delegates on the basis of equal number of delegates, comprising the chairwoman and youth leader of each party from each village/ward in the constituency.” Mr. Darboe, you have mastered the chapter and verse of your profession. I do not need to quote section 60 of the Constitution to prove that the registration of NADD was connected with, dependent on and determined by the letter and spirit of the Memorandum of Understanding that all parties signed in public knowing fully well what its contents were. NADD had to be registered in order for us to contest under its ticket. This is the requirement of the Constitution and the Elections Decree. Hence the attempt to register NADD was not a constitutional or legal blunder; on the contrary, it was a constitutional and legal necessity. Hence anyone who sees the registration of NADD as a legal and constitutional mess must equally consider his/her signing of the memorandum of understanding as a historical blunder or folly. If signing the MOU is considered a blunder where lies the integrity of its signatories. In short, before we agreed on the content of the MOU we set up a technical committee comprising the experts of all the political parties. Your party was represented by people of high intellectual calibre. Within the technical committee were former permanent secretaries and people with PhD. As far as I am concerned, the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding and the registration of NADD were the highest demonstration of political will by the opposition to bring about democratic change in the Gambia. We proved that we were determined to unite for change regardless of the peril or the cost. I must admit that the UDP representatives earned my trust for the diligent way they participated in the work of the technical committee. We should not rewrite history because of the momentary convenience and rob such honourable intellectuals of due credit. The determination mustered by all to consolidate NADD was manifested after the court decision. After our seats were declared vacant, we again had opportunity to dismantle NADD and return to contest the by-elections under our respective parties. We were given ample time to make our decisions. We concluded that our different parties will remain allies while we allow the Executive Members to remain in NADD so that it could serve as an umbrella party. This is why all Executive Members of the various parties symbolically resigned from their parties to remain Executive Committee Members of NADD. This again was the second most important demonstration of political will, by the opposition to ensure unity. It earned us the respect and admiration of the electorate for not being self seekers. The sacrifice paid dividend. We did not only win our seats back, the APRC regime became so threatened that it had to arrest members of the NADD leadership which gave rise to its total national and international isolation. The coming of President Obasanjo, the signing of the memorandum of understanding and the massive solidarity NADD received nationally and internationally confirmed that it was the best instrument to utilize to contest the 2006 presidential election. Mr. Darboe, the fact that Mr. Bah left NADD at a time when he was pursuing an election petition as a NADD candidate confirms where the political and strategic blunder originated from. We first stood by NADD with an iron will. It became an invincible rock which was split by your withdrawal. This is why NADD has done everything to open its doors for re-engagement. It is therefore immensely amazing that you would conclude that you regard our rejection of your proposal as a rejection of all invitation to discuss. I will leave the NADD Executive to clarify its point. As far as I am concerned, I have engaged you in a very honest and sincere discussion because of my conviction that an alliance is the best mechanism to contest the 2006 elections. An alliance on NADD’s terms provides conditions that we have all signed to honour. An alliance on UDP/NRP terms is yet to be defined in form and content. This is the point. NADD gave you the option of making proposal on how one of your parties should declare its desire to lead an opposition alliance and then offer its terms to other opposition parties for consideration rather than hide behind the cloak of an expanded UDP/NRP alliance which can never be known to the law. To show you that as a flagbearer of NADD I have always been opened to principled compromise, I would like to give an example of how to make our discussion relevant, realistic, and indispensable. In a word, would you agree to a proposal for NADD and the UDP/NRP Alliance to draw a list of possible candidates and then select a group of prominent Gambians to select one among their number to be a compromise candidate for the presidential elections. This candidate can be restricted to a term of 2 or 3 years to implement a rectification programme and prepare the country for free and fair elections. Secondly, it gave you the option of revisiting the MOU establishing NADD. Thirdly, it gave you the option of giving form and content to the UDP/NRP alliance to enable us to determine how it could be engaged without being an expanded part of it. How you can interpret these positions as closing the doors for discussion beats my imagination. Secondly, since the flag-bearer of your alliance wants no restriction to his term in office to a five year term, would you accept an arrangement where the NADD flag-bearer becomes the presidential candidate and sit for three or five years while a system embodying a prime minister is introduced to enable the flag-bearer of the UDP/NRP alliance to head a coalition government. The president will be barred from seeking a second term while the prime minister is allowed to seek the normal term of the presidency. These are the type of concrete proposals we expect from you as we race against time. I would want your opinion on these proposals before Saturday 12th August 2006. In the meantime, we are going ahead with our preparations to put up a candidate. If you end up being found to have taken an irreversible decision to contest the election on your own terms, we will leave history to deliver its verdict. If I fail to receive a positive response or a concrete proposal by Saturday I will issue a statement to call on the Gambian people to give full support to my candidature as the NADD flag-bearer. To conclude allow me to say that history has record of the fact that we signed a Memorandum based on commitment. We registered NADD based on conviction. We lost our seats but still decided to stand under a NADD ticket based on conviction. NADD still exists because of that conviction to unite and bring about the minimum standard of democracy necessary to enable the people to take charge of their destiny and free themselves from impunity and self perpetuating rule in order to live in liberty and prosperity. I hope we have reached a common understanding of what actually happened. If you disagree with my view I will be honoured if we meet at Father Farrell Hall to put our different positions to an audience in the interest of transparency and accountability, as we prepare the ground to challenge the APRC regime. We should clear the ground once and for all and restore the climate of respect that has always characterized our relationship. Yours in the service of the Nation. Halifa Sallah --- Momodou S Sidibeh <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Mr. Mballow, > > I recognise that it is not my prerogative to impress > on the UDP/NRP alliance > how they should go about informing concerned > Gambians all over the world as > to the alliances undertakings. > > Besides, I am a strong supporter of a principle of > organisation called > democratic centralism. But these are supposed be > private discussions between > leaders of the oppsosition, suposed to determine the > future of our country. > They concern views and positions relating to the > possibilities for a > coalition. As a citizen, I do not think it wise that > all aspects of these > exchanges should be placed on the internet; and I do > hope that only a zero > number of Gambians are still out there waiting to > make up their minds about > which way to vote by wisdom derived from reading > these exchanges. Thank You > > Good morning, > Momodou S Sidibeh > > ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ > To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of > postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface > at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html > > To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: > http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l > To contact the List Management, please send an > e-mail to: > [log in to unmask] > ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: [log in to unmask] ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤