Thanx camaraLaye for sharing. Could it be that Ousainou and Halifa are indeed saying the same things but in artfully different ways? I kept scratching my head all through the interviews conducted by the Daily News. How can two men of such stature and intellect not come together for commoner purpose??????? The ink is not dry on that prospect yet. And I'll be damned if I should abandon the challenge. There is no fundamental difference in the narration of their stories. The apparent mirages issue from tense, vocabulary, and adjective. Just read over the two interviews. What binds the Plinys is more powerful than what separates them. It will be wicked fate should they remain at gratuitous loggerhead for idle sakes. Thanx again camaraLaye for sharing. The work has only just begun. Haruna. -----Original Message----- From: Momodou Camara <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 4:27 am Subject: The Daily News: Discourse With Halifa Sallah Discourse With Halifa Sallah y Saikou Ceesay http://www.dailynews.gm/index.php?id=dn_home&tx_wecdiscussion[single]=84706 n this series of interviews, we bring for you an exclusive interview with alifa Sallah, former flag bearer of the NADD in the 2006 Presidential lections. It is our objective to bring to light controversies surrounding the ailure of the Gambian opposition leaders to form a united front capable of eing a credible alternative to the APRC regime. We started with Omar Jallow (alias OJ) of the PPP, then Lawyer Darboe of the UDP ho broke ranks with the alliance in the run up to the 2006 Presidential lections; and in this edition it is Halifa Sallah, the Coordinator of the pposition alliance NADD. Below are excerpts of the interview: Could we say that heads of opposition parties are not committed to the idea of a nited opposition front in the country? To form a united opposition cannot be seen as a principle. The principle is to uild a genuine opposition which could bring about a genuine multiparty system nd genuine change. The building of a United Opposition is a tactic under onditions of governance which does not create options for genuine multi party ontest. For example if the procedure existed for a second round of voting in he absence of 50 percent majority opposition parties would go on their own to eek the mandate of the people so that each will know its weight if they wish to orge an alliance in the second round. In the absence of that a united pposition was the missed opportunity Gambia needed to bring about a genuine emocratic environment for multi party contest. In my view those who are nterested in change would be committed to the tactics but those who are not ill always put their aspiration to occupy a post above the objectives of ringing about change to protect and promote the liberty, dignity and prosperity f the people. Is it a requirement of the signed MOU that NADD could be registered as a olitical party? The agreement is for NADD to put up candidates in the presidential, National ssembly and Council elections. This is clearly stipulated in article 8 of the emorandum of understanding. Allow me to quote it in avoidance of doubt. It tates: “The selection of the candidate of the Alliance for the Presidential, ational Assembly and Council elections shall be done by consensus: provided hat in the event of an impasse selection shall be done by holding a primary lection restricted to party delegates on the basis of equal number of delegates omprising the chairman, chairwoman and youth leader of each party from each illage/ward in a constituency. Article 16 states that the Alliance shall have n emblem, colour, motto and symbol…” There is no doubt that NADD was formed ith the intention to put up candidates under its umbrella. It is the election aws which say that NADD could not put up candidates in its name until it was egistered with the IEC. The election laws did not have any provision on how to egister an alliance. The IEC had mandate to decide on issues that are not rovided for by law. The Executive committee decided to prepare for NADD’s egistration under the existing laws and leave the IEC to decide the final utcome. Can we say that the criteria set in the MOU for the registration of candidates as met only by the UDP? Selection of Candidate was based on two fundamental principles. It had to be one either through unanimity or through a Primary. A UDP affiliated person or ny body could have been selected unanimously. In terms of primary delegates had o be party chairwomen, chairmen and youth leaders from each ward. The ontention is that if a primary was held a UDP affiliated person could have been elected as a candidate. This is now a matter of mere speculation since the UDP eader opted to resign from NADD instead of calling for a primary. Do you think national debate is the way forward for the opposition parties as entioned in Foroyaa’s Friday 23 October editorial? A country needs a credible Government and a credible opposition. Since the overnment is afraid of a debate the opposition could start a healthy debate for he people to learn to listen to divergent views and make in formed decision as o which group of people should form a government and which group should serve s major opposition party to monitor and check the activities of government. In hort, Obama and Clinton did engage in debates but that did not make them nemies at the end. Debate is the life blood of a democratic society. Without it multi party system becomes a vegetable. It is believed that in politics what matters is number, so why political heads ike your humble self opted for NADD candidacy when UDP leader should be ominated as suggested by others? I had no interest in becoming a presidential candidate. I have been with Sidia or years and he stood as presidential Candidate. I had no interest in being oordinator. If I had my own free will I would not have accepted to be oordinator of an alliance. I accepted to be a coordinator because I felt that uty has called on me to do so. I accepted to be a Presidential candidate ecause I do not run away from responsibilities when they are unanimously ntrusted. For your information one must distinguish two phases of NADD’s rocess of nominating a presidential candidate, that is, the phase before the DP leader resigned from NADD and the phase after he resigned from NADD. Before he resignation of the UDP leader he had the option to recommend for the holding f a primary where numbers would have counted and Halifa Sallah may never have een part of that contest. After the resignation of Darboe and the pulling out of UDP and NRP the issue of umbers did not arise since the committee established to nominate a Presidential andidate did agree unanimously to select me. Rejecting their nomination was not responsible option. It is also important to point out that NADD was not reoccupied with the number of votes a person had in previous elections but was ormed to ensure that our collective strength could enable an electable andidate to win. The facts revealed by the results of the 2006 Presidential lections confirm that numbers do not always add up. In short, in the 1999 -2002 eport of the IEC which was submitted to the National Assembly it is stated that he UDP leader had 149,448 votes while the NRP leader had 35,671 votes. The xpectation was that if the two parties formed an alliance in 2006 they will get n equivalent of their two results in the 2001 Presidential elections which mounted to185, 119. When the two parties left NADD and formed their Alliance along with GPDP, the DP led Alliance managed to get 104,808 and not the 185,119 votes anticipated. owever when the NADD took part in bye elections before its disintegration, it ad the upper hand in popular votes. Numbers do count sometimes. However under iven circumstances it is tactics that bring the numbers. That is how Tumani ouray became the President of Mali. He met parties with majorities but he was he electable candidate and won on an Independent ticket. We must find out what he people want to succeed. Can you tell us what justifies the registration of NADD after knowing that it ould lead to the lost of opposition seats in the National Assembly? I have already said that it was a requirement of the law for a political entity o be registered with the IEC before it could be put up as a candidate. We ormed an umbrella Party and had to register it for any body to stand as a andidate in its name. The constitution has provided for the formation of an mbrella Party in the form of a merger. In such a case no seat would be lost. oreover the advantages of establishing NADD outweighed the disadvantages of osing the seats which could be regained in a bye election which is what appened. Can you tell us the main obstacle that led to the failure of the NADD coalition? ADD was not a homogenous group. It was heterogonous in principle and spirations. The only thing that could have kept it together is recognition and dherence to its articles and institutions. The solution was there to handle an mpasse in selecting a Presidential candidate. This was not put in place. My onest opinion is that the leaders submitted to a political process they either id not understand or did not believe in and when it became clear what it ntailed they abandoned the process. Why was it a mistake to withdraw your nomination as NADD candidate and later ome for it? The UDP leader caused great confusion by making reference to the first attempt o select a Presidential Candidate without giving an accurate picture of what appened. He mentioned that in the first instance my nomination was withdrawn ut introduced later by Sam Sarr on the grounds that the first withdrawal was a istake. A big debate unfolded among the executive as to what should be done fter the successful launching of NADD. Some proposed that the launching should ake place in every division to enable the members of the different parties to ork together as NADD members. Others felt that we should proceed with the election of a presidential candidate before popularizing the NADD agenda. ventually, it was agreed that a date should be agreed to do the selection. On the day of the selection, a delegate of the NRP and another from NDAM ominated and seconded the candidature of OJ. The UDP delegate nominated the UDP eader. Sidia Jatta and Amie Sillah who represented PDOIS nominated and seconded alifa Sallah’s candidature. I was surprise and requested to speak to Sidia atta privately. Sidia told me that their proposal was for a criteria to be rawn for selection and if that fails they should resort to a primary. He ndicated that the two of them had to make a quick decision to select me so that hey PDOIS would not be seen to lack a choice since delegates were making hoices without criteria. We both recalled article 8 which indicated that the xecutive could only select someone on the basis of unanimity. Otherwise we hould go to a primary. Since more than one person was already nominated it was lear that there was an impasse. Advancing my name was a futile exercise. Sidia therefore withdrew my nomination. he executive decided to adjourn and meet again to see whether the impasse could e overcome. At that meeting Sam replaced Amie Sillah. I do not recall him aying that it was a mistake to withdraw my candidature. You may talk to him for urther clarification. I remember the arguments he gave regarding the stablishment of the criteria to guide the selection and the Chairman insisting hat if he has a nomination to make he should do so. Sam did say that he was utting Halifa Sallah nomination forward again. I think the action was more a ign of protest so that the executive will work on some criteria rather than ust making conflicting nominations which could lead us nowhere. All the ominations were eventually set aside and a committee was set up to work on a riteria for selection. This was the outcome of the first debate for selection f a Presidential Candidate. Up to that point no executive member had proposed or a primary. Is it correct that there is insincerity among heads of opposition leaders? No one has any grounds to accuse any one of insincerity. The Leader of the NDAM nd the Interim Secretary General of the PPP were part of the UDP Alliance in 001 and things fell apart after the elections. The NRP had even taken over the lue colour of the PPP when it was banned in 1996. Hence the animosities were lready there. Each had an interest to pursue. Just like constitutions protect eople with diverse interest NADD created principles, procedures and nstitutions which could foster unity been diversity. We contested elections and on them irrespective of the antagonistic contradictions between some of the eaders. Each just behaved as expected. Those who felt disappointed are those ho expected more than what NADD was worth. Neither PDOIS nor my humble self egrets being part of NADD. We were constantly accused of putting ideological urity over the need to unite to bring about change in the Gambia. We sacrificed everything to prove our critics wrong. Now we can move about with clear conscience. I proposed a party led alliance to be formed six months efore the 2006 Presidential election which is in line with the Agenda of the DP but none of the parties endorsed it. We also agreed to hold a primary incase f an impasse none of the parties proposed to have it. There is need for each to raw vital lessons and move away from passing moral judgments. As the old saying oes those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Could we say that heads of opposition parties are not committed to the idea of nited opposition in the country? To form a united opposition cannot be seen as a principle. The principle is to uild a genuine opposition which could bring about a genuine multiparty system nd genuine change. The building of a United Opposition is a tactic under onditions of governance which does not create options for genuine multi party ontest. For example if the procedure existed for a second round of voting in he absence of 50 percent majority opposition parties would go on their own to eek the mandate of the people so that each will know its weight if they wish to orge an alliance in the second round. In the absence of that a united pposition was the missed opportunity Gambia needed to bring about a genuine emocratic environment for multi party contest. In my view those who are nterested in change would be committed to the tactics but those who are not ill always put their aspiration to occupy a post above the objectives of ringing about change to protect and promote the liberty, dignity and prosperity f the people. Do you know that Gambians are of the view that the ultimate decision to select ny Presidential candidate is theirs? Since I stepped foot on my home land over 30 years ago I have been working to nsure that the sovereign Gambian people do know that it is their sovereign ight and authority to determine which person becomes their Presidential andidate and office holder among other positions of representation. I am sure any Gambians are fully aware of their sovereign powers to determine their anner of government and to criticize, scrutinize and restrain their leaders. nfortunately there are many others who still submit to intimidation, inducement nd prejudices based on blood ties, place of origin, gender, tribe and other tatus. Our duty is to open their eyes and all of us will become free and rosperous. In fact, I am now calling for the Alliance of the people as the tarting point for ensuring alliance among the political elite. People have rticised NADD for being a closet agreement which we are now trying to explain o the people. Agenda 2011 aims to start the debate about unity from the level f the people. All political forces and parties in the country should explain hat type of Unity they stand for and how it could be put into effect. The eople would then be able to determine what is realistic and what is not. Does the Gambia have a history of self-perpetuating government and if so is APRC self perpetuating government? Gambia does have a history of self perpetuating Government. We have never had a eaceful transfer of executive power. The country has never introduced any term imit for holding executive power. No effort has been made to decentralize Power. Executive power has never been restrained by independent and impartial nstitutions, civil society or an enlightened citizenry. The APRC has ransformed the constitutional instruments to enable the mandate of district, illage and regional heads to be determined by the executive. It has eliminated he second round of voting and introduces patronage at all level of national ife. Security of tenure is not guaranteed and access to development is argained for loyalty. In your candid opinion was the PPP government a self perpetuating government? The PPP regime started the history of self perpetuating rule. It has not left ny history of peaceful transfer of executive power either from one person to nother or one party to another for almost 30 years. It maintained all the onarchical features in the executive. It could appoint and dismiss ministers ithout the involvement of parliament. No term limit was placed on the xecutive. No separation was made between party, president and the state. The xecutive was above the scrutiny and restraint of Instruments, institutions, ivil society and an enlightened public. Patronage was the order of the day. Why would anybody think that if Hamat Bah or Lawyer Darboe is voted in would ead to a self perpetuating government? No one should accuse them before they assume the office. What is not helpful is he UDP leader’s comment that the Gambia does not have a history of self erpetuating rule. I don’t know why he signed the memorandum of understanding of ADD which states in article 2 that” The goal of the alliance is to put an end o self-perpetuating rule, ensure the empowerment of the people so that they can articipate in sustainable development” NADD promised to put an end to the istory of self perpetuating rule by limiting the term of the flag bearer to one o that a level ground would be created for multiparty contest. In order to achieve your target goal, political parties must address the young eople’s urgent needs by creating jobs, reducing crime levels and even combating IDS pandemic that is reportedly claiming many lives globally? The urgent needs of the young people for employment; the fight against crime and he HIV/AID pandemic should be the concern of both Governments and opposition. he Government has a duty to protect the civil, political, economic, social and ultural rights of the citizenry. The opposition has a duty to make its positive ontributions while exposing the shortcomings of the government and offering lternative policies. Do you think Gambians will listen to you [the opposition] after your falling part? The duty of Gambians is not to ignore opposition parties because they have allen apart but to listen to what they have to say in order to make informed hoices. This era is the era of the people. The people should no longer rely on earsay. They must challenge their leaders to engage in debates on all issues of ational importance. They should not see criticisms and exposures of hortcomings as negative. They should see those initiatives as mechanisms to ccess correct information to be able to make informed choices. The people could nly safeguard their sovereignty if they take ownership of their minds, seek orrect information in order to make informed choices. The battle for clarity in he camp of the opposition is not a sign of disarray it is the only way to build he credible opposition that could engage the APRC and prove to the Gambian eople that it can provide a better alternative. I am therefore inviting all ouths of intellect, character, skills and values to join us in this sovereign ational debate to define the future of this country. In this way each of us ill become a part of the architects of a destiny of liberty, dignity and rosperity. Finally is there any need for opposition parties to come together as a united ront? The UDP has made its position very clear. It sees itself as the major opposition arty and that all other parties should embrace its leader as the flag bearer. y position is that they should go to the people and promote that form of lliance.They should not make the mistake of the past by advocating for what hey do not believe in. I still maintain that NADD served UDP more than any arty in the Alliance. In short, by the time we sat to form an Alliance UDP had oycotted the National Assembly elections and had promised never to participate n elections until its conditions were met. How would UDP have come back into he electoral process and not lose face, without the opposition front we formed? t is the opposition coalition which enabled Kemeseng to gain the Jarra seat. He ost the seat when he went back to the UDP. This should be food for thought. As ar as I am concerned I am going on to put my proposal to the people. I would ant a neutral nation builder to emerge, a man or woman who would accept to run transition government of between 2 to five years and then preside over a free nd fair elections that would give Gambia a good democratic start, for overnments to emerge which will only serve for no more than two terms and then ive way to others to serve. I hope all party leaders would eventually endorse his and then be among the council of wise men and women who will select the nly candidate who will stand against President Jammeh.I will keep the media nformed of my grassroot consultation with the people. This time no party will tand between me and the people. This is the last but one service I want to do or the Gambian people, especially the future generation. Source: The Daily News ttp://www.dailynews.gm/index.php?id=dn_home&tx_wecdiscussion[single]=84706 **************************** mail: [log in to unmask] RLs: http://www.gambia.dk antaba in Cyberspace: Http://www.gambia.dk/forums/ **************************** ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ o unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web nterface t: 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 o 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://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]