I wish to interject in this discour about rights and make some observations
that I hope would help further this debate. In am with the conviction that
this subject about human rights should be the central preoccupation of all
Gambians, after all it is the guarantee of rights that asserts the human
dignity. If ever we trivialise or ignore our rights or allow anybody to deny
it to us we would be committing a fatal historical mistake which could
tantamount to societal suicide.

Central to human struggle' is humanization,this has always
been central and humanization without safeguarding of rights is
inconceivable. People have lost lives. limbs property and even freedom to
ensure that rights are protected, hence the significance of safeguarding
rights cannot be over-emphasised. That is why we must not allow semantics to
to blur it's significaqnce. In as much as we may agree or disagree about
personalities, the one fundamental issue that should bind all of us should
be our dettermination and resillience to defend the just and fight against
the unjust. The unjust and the just cannot be RELATIVE, there has to be
standard universal norms and values that are agreeable to all societies
irrespective of geo-political settings, dignity in the US and Mongolia or
Saudi should mean one thing. Hence to attempt to maje distinctions about
places and opeople is both futile and irrational. That was why just people
all over the world were disgusted with the Taliban equally just people all
over the world were disgusted the way the US was treating the Taliban
captives. This the way justice must be it has to be universally acknowleged
and applied. This why it is false to castigate Jammeh only to excuse Jawara,
a just person would try to figure out Jawara's wrongs and and abhore in as
much as Jammeh would be. Hence the whole equation with regard to Gambia we
are yet to finde a regime that is dispensing justice. Not wishing to make a
political point but stating a fact, I can recall an in-law of mine called
Baboucarr Langley whose only crime was to make a one man demonstration
hoisting a flag at an Independence parade shouting "the people are tired, we
want change". He wwas forced to confess that he was mad so that they can
release him he refused and was imprisioned, at the time he had two lovely
twin children only one month old, due to the stress and pain my sister was
going through one of the twin passed out barely another month the other one
followed, so how can anyone in their right frame of mind say this was
justice. The difference between then and now is there is more media
reporting hence nothing goes under the carpet and rightly so. Under Jammeh
all in London can testify to this I was at the centre demonstrating when the
APRC regime murdered our brothers and sisdters my aqssertion is that we must
cease comparing and attack both of them for they are all guilty to the way
they handled Gambian rights. To try to exonerate officers that were
manifestly oppressive or potray them as heroes is an affront to our
intelligence. Win the way we treat each other. To achieve this
standarddization of agreeable norms is what brought about UNIVERSAL
TREATIES, these treaties albeit not perfect serves as a bench mark to ensure
a more fairer way of treating each other.   The culmination of such treaties
were not accidental but something that had pre-occupied academics and
intellectuals for decades, hence to invent the term human rights has never
been an hiswtorical accident but it is part and parcel of the struggle for
humanity in search of equitable treatmen.
Eventhough the concept dates way further than the time frame I will be
dealing with, this period has great significance and influence. The
institutions that govern the way we deal with each other has been central to
the protection of our rights, hence their evolution. From very early in this
period the concept of egality has been recognised hence requiring political
imprint to ensure its practical enforcement and applicability. But to the
disenchantment of many the whole concept was at the time premised around
utilitarianism, in which case minority rights were never considered, what
says the majority prevailed irrepective of whatever negative consequencies
resulted. The whole notion of the liberal concept of rights was defeated,
and this was because an antecedent to liberalism held sway.

The liberal concepts of rights can be seen to owe it's antecedents to the
school 0f so-called cotractarians which found perhaps it's earliest advocate
in the writings of John Locket (THE SECCOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT 1698).
Locke imagined an actual social contract between individuals and the state
at the setting up of civil society in which citizens, in order to secure the
protection handed over certain powers, most importantly a monopoly of
coercive force, to the government in return for the guarantee of certain
rights to lives, liberties and estates

To deal with this subject we must have to make a deep historical reflection
otherwiswe we will just be gyrating in platitudes and never come to an
agreeable conclusion.


>From: Ebou Jallow <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Human Rights and the Gambian Polity
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:46:17 -0400
>
>George and Ebrima...Please refer to my earlier statements:
>
>1.    “Now how does this mean within contemporary Gambia?  I would
>caution that this is a very mangling question, and one has to walk the
>fine line of objectivity to avoid the potential sways of current
>factional politics.  At best we can expect to demonstrate the essence
>of human rights within our socio-economic experience and leave the rest
>to legitimate politics to interpret.”
>
>
>2.    “I would like to establish here that my previous article is
>just a groundwork of ideas that I think might incite very fruitful
>solutions to human rights issues in the Gambia.   Let me emphasize
>again that my opinion is purely apolitical, and I try as much as
>possible to avoid specific trends or facts in the Gambia that might
>embroil the discussions into a partisan debate.”
>
>Nevertheless, I will assume that the above statements are crystal clear
>unless you raise a specific question that is quite inherently
>impertinent.  I believe this may help us avoid going around circles.
>
>Finally, Ebrima again there are alot of tangential issues you raised in
>your last response that I believe have absolutely no positive bearing
>to this discourse.  For example, your posture without any concrete
>demonstration and I will quote you-“ The fact of the matter is you
>loaded your piece with revolutionary thinking of philosophers, the very
>purpose of whose arguments were completely misrepresented at the tail
>end of your previous posting.”
>
>You know Ebrima I wish you could prove your case.  Now putting all this
>human rights debate aside for a moment, I believe regressing into the
>past to excavate ugly memories shall only serve to stymie the
>therapeutic effects of reconciliation.  What is done can never be
>undone.  The abuse excuse game plan is over.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface
>at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~