Issue No. 9/ 2004, 29 Jan-1 Feb, 2004

Editorial

Commission of Enquiry From 1994 to Date Promised

President Jammeh has told the Nation that he would set up a Commission of
Enquiry to investigate how people occupying office of public trust had
acquired their resources. He said the enquiry would start with himself.

It is a Constitutional provision under Section 200 that

"The President may, whenever he/she deems it advisable, issue a Commission
appointing one of more Commissioners and authorizing such Commissioners to
inquire into the conduct and management of any department or authority of
the public service or any local government authority or public service."

"Any matter whatever arising in the Gambia in which an enquiry would in the
opinion of the President be for the public good."

In short, when a Commission of Enquiry finishes its work it makes a report
to the President who must take action. One may now ask: How would the
President react when adverse findings against him is reported to him for
action? Some people argue that even though they do not expect President
Jammeh to be subjected to enquiry by a Commission the statements he is
making is making people close to him to be restrained.

In our view, if the President was really serious about accountability, he
would have found out what is holding the Auditor General’s Report to the
National Assembly for the past years and then raise the necessary fund or
provide the necessary facilities to make them perform their task with speed.

Notwithstanding, the whole nation is waiting for the President to subject
himself to asset evaluation. This would indeed be a history in the making.
As the old saying goes, ‘the proof of the pudding is in the eating’. The
future will tell.





BABA JOBE’S TRIAL

PART 10

No Case To Answer - Defence

The trial of Majority Leader, Baba Jobe, the Managing Director of YDE, Baba
Kanteh and the YDE itself has reached a new stage. The prosecution has
closed its case and the defence says the accused have no case to answer. On
Tuesday, January 27, 2004 two defence lawyers namely Mr. Edward Gomez and
Mr. Lamin Jobarteh addressed the court.

The leading lawyer in the defence team in addressing the court informed the
court that the three accused persons have been charged with six counts of
economic crimes and related offences.

Mr. Gomez submitted that the onus of proof of guilt in a criminal trial of
this nature rests with the prosecution. He then asserted that the
prosecution had done nothing that would warrant the defence to enter their
case.

He noted that Count One alleges that the accused failed to pay port duties
to the tune of D27million (twenty seven million dalasis) contrary to section
5 (b) of the Economic Crimes Decree . Mr. Gomez submitted that none of the
seven prosecution witnesses had shown proof of intention to defraud the
state of revenue by the accused persons. He cited the evidence of Mr. Deen
of GPA whom he said told the court that he wrote a letter to YDE asking them
to settle their debt on port duties and handling charges. He argued that the
letter clearly made reference to a debt and not losses. He also made
reference to the letter to the Secretary General Office of the President,
noting that the emphasis was on outstanding loans and not losses.

He further submitted that Mr. Deen’s admission of a payment of D299,000 (Two
hundred and ninety thousand dalasis) by YDE to GPA showed the gesture and
will of the YDE to pay and not to defraud as alleged. He asserted that the
letter of YDE dated 1st October 2003 shows compromise and the will to pay.
He further pointed out that after the letter of Lawyer Drammeh, GPA and YDE
were negotiating. He noted that Mr. Deen informed the court that YDE not
Baba Jobe or Baba Kanteh have been the credit customer of GPA. He also
pointed out that Mr. Deen acknowledged that the YDE had 822,000 (eight
hundred and twenty two thousand) metric tonnes of rice in GPA stores. He
argued that the value of this rice far exceeds the amount owed by YDE to
GPA.

He submitted that the law gives power to the GPA in cases of this nature to
impound and sell such goods of the importer to recover such loans.

On the cheques, Mr. Gomez submitted that Mr. Deen, under cross examination,
denied that Baba Jobe issued him with over thirty cheques. He then submitted
that there was no proof of intention to defraud the state of revenue
amounting to D27 million in the evidence of Mr. Deen that would constitute
economic crime.

Regarding the evidence of Mr. Aziz Samba, Financial Director, GPA Mr. Gomez
submitted that it shows no proof of counts one and two.

He then submitted that the testimony of Kaba Tambajang revealed that by
October 2003 YDE had paid up to D1.6 million which shows their intention of
not evading customs duties. He emphasized that Mr. Tambajang acknowledged
that the Customs dealt with YDE and not the two accused.

On the issue of duty waivers Mr. Gomez submitted that the evidence adduced
before the

Court clearly shows that duty waivers were issued by the Department of State
for Finance and Economic Affairs in favour of YDE. He cited Exhibits O, P
and AA8 to back his assertion. He also cited Exhibits Y1, Y2 and Y3 as
examples of applications of direct delivery that have taken notice of all
the required customs procedure for direct delivery. He concluded that all
these are proof that there was no intention of defrauding or causing losses
to the state as alleged in the charges.

Mr. Gomez submitted that the evidence of Buba Baldeh was very helpful to the
court in that he had said that he himself and Buba Senghore had gone to the
GPA and Customs on several occasions to find out, assess, reconcile and so
on, so as to come up with a payment plan to the GPA and Customs.

On Mr. Ousman Mboge’s evidence Mr. Gomez submitted that this witness
eloquently replied to a question from the DPP:

Q: How do you categorize the remaining D73,933,000?

A: As outstanding duties to be collected by Customs.

In conclusion, Mr. Gomez called on the court to acquit and discharge the
accused persons since the prosecution has not laid any evidence that has
shown proof that the accused were at any time involved in anything aimed at
committing economic crimes and any of the related charges as alleged.

See the next issue for the addresses of Mr. Jobarteh and the Prosecutor.


Trial of Modou Soma Jobe

The trial of Modou Soma Jobe resumed on Thursday the 22nd January 2004 in
Farafenni. When the case was mentioned, Lawyers Jobarteh and Borry Touray
stood to announce their presence for the accused person.

Mr. Jobarteh told the court that Mr. Edu Gomez who had earlier appeared for
the accused was on a mission in Banjul, but promised to be in court by the
next sitting.

At this point, the Prosecutor stood up to apply for an adjournment on the
grounds that the senior prosecutor, Sgt. Jahateh, who is responsible for
this case was on an official mission to Banjul.

Lawyer Jobarteh objected to the application filed by the prosecution and
asked the case to proceed. Magistrate Mbye overruled out the objection and
adjourned the case till 25th February 2004.

Murmuring could be heard amongst curious court attendants who were eager for
the case to proceed. Many felt disappointed that Sgt. Jahateh was not in
court.

Sectorial Review of President Jammeh’s Interview

THEY ARE ENEMIES AND NOT OPPOSITION

The first analysis dealt with a comprehensive analysis of the future of
government policy in agriculture. Let us now take the issue of road
construction. According to the president his critics never express
appreciation for the good things he is doing. They often say that building
roads and schools are a waste of money. Let us now examine some of the views
from political figures who see themselves as an alternative.

When the president was asked to state his vision for road construction he
did not indicate what it was. There is no doubt that PDOIS national assembly
members were the first to indicate that there should be integrated planning
in building roads; that it was destructive to build roads without
considering drainage; that it was more destructive to build roads and start
to dig it to give room for installation of pipes and other gadgets. It has
been argued that only about 20% of roads in The Gambia are surfaced; that
due to such limitations government should have the foresight to work out a
strategic plan for an integrated road network scheme. The emphasis has been
strategic intervention. What does this mean?

It means that government must identify the areas that can open up the
country internally and externally to maximum communication for social
interaction and economic activity. It has been pointed out that building a
part of the South or North bank roads while the other parts remain
disregarded is counter-productive. It does not save time and reduce cost. On
the contrary, it increases the cost of maintenance of vehicles and fares.
The government should therefore approach different donors in an integrated
fashion after testing the plan to provide one good North Bank road from
Barra to the upper river and a south bank stretch from Banjul to the upper
river. Secondary roads can be built by the councils to feed the main roads.

Furthermore, the roads that would open up the external links of the country
should be focused on and integrated to the main internal road building plan.
The Basse-Wellingara, Hamdalai-Barra, Mandinaba-Siliti, etc roads can be
built with the cooperation of Senegal, Guinea Bissau, Guinea Conakry and so
on, that ultimately there will be a road stretching to several countries in
the sub-region. European tourists are travelling from Europe to The Gambia
by road. Through integrated road planning we can open our country internally
and externally to the free movement of people, goods and services. What
better plan can APRC give? Can another government not get loans to build
roads?

What then is the APRC doing on road construction that an alternative
government cannot do? Why should people criticize destructively and say that
roads and hospitals are wastage of resources. People who see themselves as
better alternatives can never utter such remarks. The president should state
who he is directing his statements to for people to determine whether he is
correct or not. He may see opposition as enemies. The people however see a
genuine alternative government emerging to address the current crisis of
ignorance and underdevelopment.

An alternative government always wishes the existing government to do its
best and prove that its best is not good enough for The Gambia. Such people
have no time to have personal enemies.

_________________________________________________________________
Check out the great features of the new MSN 9 Dial-up, with the MSN Dial-up
Accelerator. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/

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

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