The following article is culled from Burning Issues (FOROYAA) Publication. I
have tried to make paragraphs so that the text is easily readable and possible
errors during this process are mine and not that of FOROYAA. You can send your
request to [log in to unmask] if you want to be added to their mailing list for
the Burning Issues.
****************************
IEC's Test Case
How UDP And APRC Struggle For The Minds Of The People
It is true that in a sovereign republic the people should control power. The
authority to lead them should be derived from their consent. This is done
through elections. This is why a voting system which is free and fair is
essential for the free expression of the will of the people. The IEC is the
institution which should ensure free and fair voting in the country. The IEC
was accused of helping the APRC to rig elections in the 1996/97 presidential
and national assembly elections. Mr. Gabriel Roberts was accused of being the
principal architect of the alleged rigging. Once the 1997 constitution came
into force, Bishop Tilewa Johnson was appointed chairperson of the IEC. The
establishment of an Inter-party Consultative Committee, the demarcation of
constituencies without any influence by the state, the holding of a free and
fair chieftaincy elections in Sami added up to give the IEC credibility. That
credibility was put into question when the president removed the chairman of
the IEC from office. This decision was considered to be unconstitutional. All
opposition parties were opposed to the decision. International observers became
concerned. The prospects of having free and fair election became dim.
Initiatives were taken to challenge the constitutionality of the removal of
Bishop Johnson and Imam Fatty. The appointment of Mr. Gabriel Roberts raised
eyebrows. The UDP castigated him as the person responsible for their election
loses in 1996/97. PDOIS indicated that the constitutionality of the removal of
the members of the commission was its primary preoccupation and that the
restoration of constitutionality was indispensable. Before the dust settled two
national assembly members died in an accident. The IEC decided to prepare for
by elections as stipulated by the constitution. The UDP and the NRP took a case
to court and are represented by the UDP leader and Mariam Denton a UDP
representative. One of the applications made by the UDP and NRP was for the
Supreme Court to put on hold the operation of the new members of the commission
until the constitutionality of the removal of the other members was decided.
Prior to the decision of the supreme court, the UDP announced that it will
participate in the by elections and any other elections held under the present
members of the IEC. Soon after that the supreme court also ruled that it could
not put the present operation of the IEC on held until the constitutionality of
the previous members are determined. Mr. Gabriel Roberts invited the political
parties to a meeting to gain their confidence. PDOIS declined to attend on the
basis that the constitutionality of the removal of the previous members were
yet to be determined. The APRC, UDP and NRP attended. The UDP and NRP came out
of the meeting to make public declarations that an understanding had been
reached with the IEC on how to handle electoral matters. Further consultation
led to the agreement to count ballots at polling stations. This was announced
by the UDP organising secretary at a rally. He indicated that this will
eliminate any basis for rigging of votes at the level of counting. The
organising secretary of the UDP confirmed to his audience that PDOIS was not
present when the agreements were being made. PDOIS therefore was not a factor
in the by elections.
On March ... 2001, the APRC and UDP candidates submitted nomination papers for
the Baddibu Central and Kiang East by election. Mr. Sekou Satou Saho
represented the APRC while Mr. Lamin Ndanbung Dibba represented UDP for the
Central Baddibu seat. Mr. Mahawa Cham represented APRC and Mr. Bakary F.B.
Jarju represented the UDP for the Kiang East seat.
The Campaign
The campaign was taken very seriously by both sides. Mr. Ousainou Darboe, Mr.
Lamin Waa Juwara and many key personalities of the UDP led the campaign for the
UDP.
Mr. Yankuba Touray, Mr. Nai Ceesay, Mr. Baba Jobe and many other cabinet
members and personalities like Alhagi Banta Camara, Mr. Buba Baldeh led the
APRC campaign. Commissioners and assistant commissioners joined the campaign
trail. The Independent press gave ample coverage to the two sides and the
electronic media also broadcast what is found in the pages of newspapers. The
state radio and Television also gave coverage to the meetings as well as the
broadcast of the candidates and their supporters. The radio and television
coverage of meetings often lasted for one hour. The broadcast last for about 20
minutes. On the broadcasts, FOROYAA had just one complained from a UDP
organiser that in addition to the television coverage at Njolofen they should
have covered their rally in Masembe. Most of the party stalwarts of the APRC
and UDP that our reporters interviewed felt that the radio and television
coverage had been sufficient to enable the voter to hear the main messages and
gauge the differences between the two parties.
Alliances
The presence of Dr. Lamin Saho in Baddibu on behalf of the APRC, Mr.
Buba Baldeh in Kiang on behalf of the APRC and Mr. Hamat Bah in Njolofen
(Kataba) on behalf of the UDP extended the nature of the campaign during the by
elections. The issues raised at the campaign gave the impression that a
presidential rather than national assembly election was at stake. President
Jammeh was often presented as a leader who brought tractors, schools within
the reach of farming communities, roads and hospitals. Voters were often told
that opposition only leads to deprivation of facilities. Mr. Darboe was often
presented as the next president of the Gambia who would get rid of all
injustices which had happened since 1994. That the UDP has a manifesto and
would bring development through its manifesto. The Key Features Of the Campaign
For UDP UDP leadership raised the issue that groundnuts were not being bought
on time thus causing hardships to farmers. They indicated that the APRC's
failure to give state funeral to Honourable Buba Samura and Honourable Karamba
Gassama signified that they had no respect for the people of Kiang East and
Baddibu Central; that students were murdered on April 10 and 11th without the
government taking action. A person like Fabakary Kolior Camara did explain how
he was recruited into the July 22nd Movement and how they were mobilised during
the 1996/97 elections to intimidate people. He explained his role in denying
Mr. Juawara participation at the Conference in Mansakonko on reform of Local
Government Structures. Sentiments were moved as he and the other asked for
forgiveness and the APRC being warned not to touch them; that the UDP would
inform the people that many of the projects started by the APRC are incomplete
and cannot bring new projects to Kiang East and Baddibu Central; that there is
the corruption which it said it will end; that APRC is building schools etc.
but is not equipping the facilities properly.
The Main Shortcomings Of The Campaign
It is extremely incomprehensible why UDP allowed its platform at Njaba kunda to
be used by people who openly called for Mandinkas to unite as Jolas are uniting
and then allowed it to be broadcast nationally.
The APRC's Key Issues
The APRC claimed that they saw the national assembly members as Muslims who did
not need state funerals, but state funeral is not a rule; that when Mr. Darboe
insisted for a state funeral, they agreed but he rejected it just to make it a
political issue; that where Mr. Darboe is from a Marabout had prayed that no
one from that village should become a king; that those who aim to be kings
should not go to the village; that Mr. Darboe does not go to the village; that
the accident occurred when those people went to open a mosque at the village.
In short, the APRC tried to put the blame on Mr. Darboe. They further went on
to say that they took D42, 000 to the homes of the deceased to pay condolences
but Mr. Darboe rejected; that they had intension for Jammeh foundation to pay
the schooling of the children of the two national assembly members as well as
provide them with compounds if they had none. The aim was to neutralise the
damage done by not giving the two national assembly members state funerals.
Furthermore, they mentioned the projects and challenged the UDP to explain how
they will bring projects if they were in office. They tried to attacked the
integrity of individual UDP members like Mr. Juwara. They explained that the
groundnut problem was caused by the PPP sale of GPMB, that they have a
liberalised economy which requires the private sector to purchase groundnuts;
that tractors will increase. In appealing to the sentiments of the people, they
continued to accuse the UDP as a tribalist party in order to win the votes
from language groups in Kiang East and Baddibu Central. In order to alienate
the finances of the UDP, the APRC started to use examples such as the
following: Yankuba would say that he has built his own father's home but that
many of the rich businessmen from Baddibu had abandoned their homes in Baddibu
and have built homes in Pipeline.
He would point out to the old corrugated iron sheets and broken pillars and ask
why the rich businessmen would finance the UDP instead of building their homes
in Baddibu for their people to live. Such campaigns were intensified as the
casting of votes drew near.
The Campaign Atmosphere
According to the UDP, APRC and IEC a series of meeting were held between the
stake holders to discuss how to ensure a free and fair elections. That campaign
rules were made for the two parties to stay clear of each other while on their
campaign trail.
The Njaba Kunda incident where APRC intruded as the UDP held its meeting was
seen as an infringement. The UDP has raised concern with the IEC but had
acknowledged that calm return after some stone throwing by party supporters.
FOROYAA reporters have not seen any one who considered the atmosphere totally
inappropriate for the holding of elections. Up to the time of counting the
ballots each party was confident of victory. Resources Both parties are fully
financed. However, the APRC has overwhelming financial advantage. It is the
party at the helm.
Apparently, when president Jammeh indicated that politics was dirty he had in
mind the accumulation of money to patronise voters. APRC used all forms of
inducement to patronise voters. Election Tactics The UDP sent a delegation to
Mr. Sheriff Dibba to give blessing to the candidature of Mr. Lamin Dibba. The
Dibba factor played a part in their tactics. Apparently, they took for granted
that Salikene has the largest number of voters and chose their candidate from
there. Salikene had a total number of 2100 votes.
APRC Tactics
The APRC nominated candidates from Massembe and Salikene in anticipation that
the two candidates would have a close race in their home villages. Having moved
the chieftaincy to Kaiaf in Kiang East and Njaba kunda in Central Baddibu, the
APRC expected high votes from these two villages. The fact that the people of
Kabada, Kiang Central had pressurised their NRP candidate to visit president
Jammeh where they declared that they were never in the opposition but voted for
their own son as a sign of protest, lends credibility to the expectation that
the people of Kabada in Kiang East would stick to the APRC.
The Results
On 31st March 2001, the results of the by elections were declared. In Kiang
East, the total number of votes are 3, 831. 1, 056 voters did not vote. Out of
the 2,775 persons who voted, Mahaw Cham of the APRC had 1, 784 votes or 64.29
percent while Bakary Jarju of the UDP had 991 votes or 35.71 percent. Out of
the 5 polling stations UDP had majority only in Kolior. In Njolofen where Mr.
Hamat Bah campaigned for UDP, APRC had 358 votes while UDP had 40 votes. This
is important to note as people suggest alliances between opposition parties. Is
it alliances alone that will bring victory or campaign issues.?
Central Baddibu
In central Baddibu, there are 7,320 registered voters. Only 4, 928 voters
voted. 2392 people did not vote. This is equivalent to the votes of the APRC
candidate.
Lamin Dibba had 2534 votes or 51.44 percent. Sekou Satou Saho of the APRC had
2392 votes or 48.56 percent. There are 11 polling stations in Central Baddibu.
APRC had more votes in Minteh Kunda, Kerr Pateh, Daru Rilwan, Nawleru, Najaba
Kunda. UDP had more votes in Madori, Kinteh Kunda and Salikene. UDP has 1522
votes of its 2534 votes from Salikene.
The Lessons
The lesson is simple. In Kiang East, Buba Samura of the UDP had 1412 or 50.63
percent votes while Ansumana Sanneh of the APRC had 1377 or 49.37 percent votes
during the 1997 national assembly elections. The difference between the two
candidates was 35 votes in favour of the UDP. In 2001 the UDP vote shrinked
from 1412 to 991 votes while the APRC vote rose from 1377 votes to 1784 votes.
With the large amount of resources, the APRC had at its disposal during the
campaign, it has managed to increase its votes by only 307. Furthermore in
1997, Mr. Abu Karamba Gassama of Central Baddibu had 3192 votes while Janko
Fatou Jaiteh had 2298. In 1997 5490 voters cast their votes. In 2001 only 4928
cast their votes. The UDP vote dropped from 3192 to 2534 while the APRC vote
rose by a small margin, from 2298 votes to 2392 votes. Analyst must ask why
more than 2392 persons did not vote.
Is it simply voters apathy?
Were the votes bought which would also reflect lack of commitment to the voting
process. FOROYAA has repeatedly said that opposition parties in the Gambia can
never make head way in the Gambia until the minds of the people are liberated.
In the latter days of Jawara's rule, the cross carpeting of opposition
candidates after the people struggle vehemently to help them to win had made
the people to be skeptical of opposition. It is necessary now to intensify the
education of the people to understand the benefits of change. The people
already know better than any one what suffering means under the order. What is
not clear to them is whether voting for an opposition candidate can end that
suffering or increase it. How to convince the people that even where the ruling
party is in office electing an opposition national assembly member is still the
best thing to do is the challenge before the opposition. One thing that is
however clear is that tribalism in Gambian politics has no basis. Mandinka,
Fula, and Jola speaking Gambians who have had candidates with supporters
appealing to their sentiments should now abandon such sentiments and look for
Gambian patriots who are ready to put national interest, justice and prosperity
for all first before personal interest. It is important for the UDP and NRP
leaders to draw the lesson that coalition among the opposition must be linked
to issues that enlightens the masses and not just on personalities and
sentiments. Furthermore, the UDP leadership should now build up a new party
image. UDP cannot continue to work as a shadow of the PPP, NCP and GPP. If it
is any body's view that the UDP is a coalition between the PPP, NCP and GPP
then that coalition is no longer viable. What the UDP leadership should do as
Decree 89 falls to pieces is to establish its own identity and leave the other
parties to maintain their identity. FOROYAA has said over and over again that
the past is totally discredited among the young people in this country. Any
attempt by a party to link itself to the past will lead to voter apathy. Ex-
president Jawara should simply seek to be an elderly statesman who will be
respected and left to live the rest of his life in the country in peace and
leave a new generation to handle our present challenges. At the moment, the
biggest battle for change is the battle against ignorance and the battle for
credibility for the forces of change. All opposition forces should reassess
their situation and draw new lessons. In FOROYAA's view, the masses are losing
faith in so-called educated people. They receive contradictory messages from
them. There are those who are benefiting from the present state of things and
others are hoping for a change of face so that they can be the new
beneficiaries in the future state of affairs. Both elite or prospective forces
do not want the masses to be aware. They just appeal to them on sentiments. All
those who wish for change must join hands to combat the tactics of those who
are looking for quick fix rather than doing the pain-taking work of
enlightening the people and restoring their dignity and sovereign will to be
the commanders of their own minds and destiny. This is the way forward for
mental liberation and political transformation.
*******************************************************
http://home3.inet.tele.dk/mcamara
**"Start by doing what's necessary, then what's
possible and suddenly you are doing the impossible"***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
