¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.htmlProperty rights indeed Daffeh, but I was asking about the amendment to Schedule 2 in 2001 on a different point, and that was why I stated "Whilst we are on Schedule 2, what do you think about the indemnity clause inserted in the Schedule?". I was simply soliciting your thoughts on the amendment to the Schedule.Schedule 2 precluded any amendment of its provisions but that did not stop the government from amending it in 2001, a whole four years after the Constitution came into force. The larger point here is that we are dealing with raw political power and that these legal shenanigans would unravel post APRC. I think this was what Demba was insinuating in his earlier reaction to you. It is also the reason why the PPP should have asserted its rights in the Courts regardless of outcome as there has to be some kind of settlement in the future when the playing field is levelled for all residents of The Gambia to freely invoke their legal rights.LJDarboOk. First of all, the April 10th and 11 incidents did not happen under the watch of the AFPRC junta but the APRC government. The legal distinction between the two is obvious and needless to explain.Secondly, the provisions I quoted are only relevant to the AFPRC junta. It does not afford the APRC government any right to unlawfully confiscate private property and they are explicitly prohibited from doing so unless otherwise justified by law and decreed by a court of law.Finally, the April 10th and 11 incident indemnity law is not concern with property rights. We are speaking in the context of asserting property rights.ThanksDaffeh
On Wednesday, 30 April 2014, Lamin Darbo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:DaffehI am not asking the PPP to do anything, only arguing that the party never bothered to do anything about its propertyl rights and must therefore not complain about a lack of support from Gambians. Supporting the PPP was the last thing in anyone's mind in 1994 for there was overwhelming congruence of opinion that its government got what it deserved.
In any case, if BB did take action on his personal rights notwithstanding Schedule 2, what should have stopped the PPP from so acting? BB was wrong to blame Gambians for the fate of his government and party. I have seen nothing to change my view that the PPP deserved to be overthrown. This side of 1994, it is a moot point but I have argued that position even before 1994 and was not surprised when it came to pass. Sorry if you are offended but that is my view!
LJDarboLamin, there is no point in them doing so. There is an overwhelming case law in this area and their chances of success is utter. It would not make any economic or political sense for them to do what you are asking them to do. It will not only open them to judicial ridicule-the case will be deemed frivolous and rightly dismissed most likely with cost-, it will amount to utter waste of time and money as well.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] ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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] ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤