-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Foroyaa Burning Issue
From: "Amie Sillah" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, July 26, 2004 1:18 pm
To: [log in to unmask]
Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 59/2004, 26-28 July, 2004
EDITORIAL
45 Million + 260 Million Out of Social Security Funds for a Hotel
The President Justifies the Expenditure
The Private and Public Sector have capacity to invest. There is no
objection for the Public Sector to invest where maximum gain can be
made. Infact, if Public Corporations can make huge gains they
should be able to pay more dividends to government for public services.
The experience of the government with Senegambia Beach Hotel is the
failure to earn dividends. How long will it take to recover 305
Million Dalasis investment? What is government’s priority?
The groundnut industry has been a problem all these years. Suffice
it to say 305 Million Dalasis could have enabled the federation of
cooperative societies to purchase all the nuts, sell them at one go and
recover the sum invested with interest for Social Security. In our
view, the government has misplaced its priorities. There are no
skeptics as the President claims. There are objective critics whose
views the President refuses to acknowledge bec! ause of the misplacement
of its priorities.
Public Corporations should be linked to the goals of food self
sufficiency, input substitution and general welfare. Financing the
groundnut crop is a greater priority. We are therefore right to
accuse the government of not managing the country on the basis of mature
policy making which has to speak the language of priorities.
Gambians do not even have to wait to see whether the Ocean Bay Hotel will
yield profit for Social Security or not. We are hundred percent
sure that it will not repay the 305 Million Dalasis investment in a year
while the buying and selling of groundnuts can yield such huge sums of
money in a year. If the government disagrees with this it can write
to FOROYAA to explain its position and we will publish!
it. If they fail to do so then one should know that the President
is simply calling genuine critics, detractors because of the lack of
sincerity to acknowledge truth when he sees it.
Halifa Still on the July 22nd Commemoration
FOROYAA: The President’s speech during the celebration at the
Stadium did not have any castigation of the opposition but during his
address to the Women, he indicated that the Opposition never mentions the
good things that the government is doing, What do you have to say to
this? Halifa: Of course he vacillates between maturity and
mediocrity. A head of state who is cultured in democratic values
would constantly bear in mind that he/she is a caretaker, a public
trustee. He/she would see the office of President to be a public
property. One would realise that he/she is just one of those who
may be selected by the people to occupy the seat. He/she would
accept that any person with the qualification has equal right and duty to
seek the mandate of the people if they so desire. Such a person
would simply do his/her best and would be ready to engage in a debate
with those who claim that his/her best is not good enough for the
people. A mature leader would not castigate such people as jealous,
envious or as detractors. Hence when the President says that
everyone, irrespective of their political view, have a duty to contribute
to the development of the country he could be considered to be displaying
political maturity. If he accuses those who scrutinize, criticize
and restrain his government as detractor and jealous people he should be
seen to be displaying political immaturity. I continue to emphasize
that people should not be angered by what the President says. They
should rely on it to judge whether he is fit to occupy the highest
position of public trust on the land. I am more concerned about the
maturity of those who seek to be alternatives to the governme! nt.
I am confident that if an alternative emerges that displays the highest
level of political maturity the President would be isolated if he
displays any political immaturity. This is the way forward for the
country. FOROYAA: He claims that he can provide better husbands to women
who are divorced by the husbands for their support of the APRC? Halifa:
This was a meeting organized by women. The President should have
been telling them what empowerment of women means; that they had
citizenship power and an equal voice to say who will be President,
National Assembly Member, Councillor; that they should not accept
dictation from any one but should exercise their freedom of choice with
maturity. He should have told them to have the maturity that would
enable them to inspire their husbands, children and peers to serve the
interest of the Nation and elevate the status of women to occupy their
rightful places as equal partners in sovereign existence and development
with men. Of course, the President is simply interested in
transforming women into his political tools rather than liberate
them. This is why he ! would focus on such irrelevant issues on
such an important occasion, which took so much money and energy to put
together. I am sure all the women had a healthy laugh.
In actual fact the words should make them to ask themselves whether the
time, money and energy they mustered to the occasion was meant to promote
the interest of women or the image of the President. In my view the
marriage did not have any iota of the type of information that could help
women to understand themselves, their country and the world so that that
can earn the type of confidence that they need to be equal partners in
nation building. It is still the political patronage all the way.
FOROYAA: How do you see the participation of the people?
Halifa: Information is still being received regarding the expenditure and
the method of mobilization. I still comment on this to pass
judgment on whether there was more popular involvement than inducement
and intimidation in the whole exercise of mobilizing the masses.
The facts being gathered are interesting. JUDGEMENT ON DUMO SAHO &
CO TREASON TRIAL
Reports reaching this paper have it that Justice Ahmed Belgore will
deliver judgment on the treason trial involving Ebrima Barrow, Modou Dumo
Saho and Ebrima Yarbo of GAMTEL, this week. The Trio who where charged
alongside Lt. Omar Darboe, Lt. Lalo Jaiteh and Momodou Marenah have been
languishing at the Remand Wing of the Mile II Central Prison since June
2000. They were charge of six counts of treason and arraigned
before Justice Wallace Grante, and subsequently arraigned before Justice
Ahmed Belgore. Lawyer Ousman Sillah was counsel for Lt. Darboe, Lt.
Jaiteh and Ebrima Yarbo. Momodou Marenah was represented by Lawyer
Ousainou Darboe, whilst Ba Tambedou and Darboe represented Dumo
Saho. Lawyer Mai Fatty later represented Ebrima Barrow who was
earlier on represented by Ousman Sillah. The Two Lieutenants were
acquitted and discharged by the court after the defence made its
address. Momodou Marenah was acquitted and discharged after
the defence made a No Case Submission. The court ruled that a prima
facie case was established by the prosecution and the accused persons
were ordered to put up their defence. The defence later thought it
prudent to look at the totality of the evidence before the court.
Judgment was scheduled for February 2004. However it was later
adjourned indefinitely.
AT THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
pThe Debate on the Amendment of the Local Government Act
The following is Halifa Sallah’s contribution to the debate on the
amendment of the Local Government Act during the last meeting of the
National Assembly in March this year which was not published. The hourly
and daily occurrences in local government areas and the attitude of
central government echoes the relevance of the contribution. In his
contribution, Halifa argued that the amendment was intended to give
absolute power to the secretary of state for local government to muzzle
the councils. Read on. Halifa, in his contribution noted that the
confusion of role that the secretary of state referred to is the
refusal of government to acknowledge that the Chairpersons of local
government authorities are the political heads of the local government
areas, pointing out that the attempt to nullify it in practice is what
has led to the total confusion. He argued that instead of handling the
problem administratively, they are now using the legal instrument to
legitimize the illegitimate, that is, to give the impression that these
Mayors and Chairpersons are civil servants under the Secretary of State
and the President, who can be toyed with and thrown about at anytime. At
this point, Halifa Sallah stated that the Local Government Act,
irrespective of its inadequacy, created a clear line of demarcation
between the powers of the Councils as local government authorities and
the powers of central government. That is why section 20 of the original
Act is fundamentally different from section 151. The intentions were
different, he emphasised. He argued that the objective of this amendment
is to integrate the two and give the Secretary of State absolute power to
muzzle the Councils. “That’s the objective!” he stressed. “And the
experiment was very clear with Brikama Area Council. The very thing we
criticized here is what is being put in an Act now, that is, the
Secretary of State having power to close offices, to suspend Chairpersons
and then these people have to bow their heads and put their hands around
their backs to go to a president to appeal within 30 days. That is the
intention! It was established in practice!
illegally and now it is being legitimized.”
At this stage, Halifa now dealt with the section 20 of the original Act.
He noted that section 20 subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of the
original Act creates a mechanism of internal self-control of Councils. He
stated that where specifically, members of the Council accuse the
Chairperson of any misdeed, they have to stipulate it in a notice and if
two-thirds of them accept, they would also have to provide the evidence.
He then indicated that this is how a Council should act; that an
autonomous Council, seeing that their Chairperson is corrupt or whatever,
will take this specific action. He cited subsection (2) of section 20 of
the original Act which states that for the purpose of removing the
Chairperson for abuse of office, corruption, misconduct or such mental or
physical incapacity as would render him or her incapable of discharging
the duties of the office, a notice in writing shall be signed by not less
than two-thirds of all members of the Council and shall be submitted to
the Deputy Chairperson. The notice shall state that they intend to pass a
resolution to remove the Chairperson on any of the grounds set out above
e.g., corruption, misconduct, etc. It shall also set out, except in the
case of physical and mental incapacity, the particulars of the charge,
supported by necessary documents, where applicable, on which it is
claimed that the conduct of the Chairperson be investigated for the
purpose of removal. Halifa Sallah now proceeded to the next step
stipulated under subsection (3) which was part of the amendment. He
quoted this subsection as saying that “the Deputy Chairperson shall
within twenty-four hours after receipt of the notice referred to him /
her under subsection (2), cause a copy to be submitted to the
Chairperson, the Chief Justice and Secretary of State.” He emphasized
that it is very clear that the notice will be communicated to the
Chairperson, the Chief Justice and the Secretary of State. He now went
on to the next step, as provided by subsection (4). It states that, “the
Chief Justice shall, within seven days after receipt of the notice under
subsection (3), constitute a tribunal comprising such number of judges of
the High Court as the Chief Justice determines to - (a)
investigate the allegation contained in the notice; and
(b) report its findings to the Council, stating whether or not
there is a case for the removal of the Chairperson.” Halifa Sallah at
this point indicated that the mayor is somebody elected by thousands of
people and you therefore, you cannot remove such person in a very
ordinary manner; by a Secretary of State who is not even elected but
simply appointed and can be removed by the scratch of a pen. He
emphasized that somebody having a popular mandate cannot be removed for
frivolous reasons, noting that this is why the Chief Justice shall
constitute a tribunal to look into the charges. If they found the person
guilty, then the removal can take place. “This is an in-built mechanism
of autonomous organisations to be responsible of reprimanding wrongdoing.
That is what autonomy is all about,” Halifa Sallah added. Halifa Sallah
also pointed out that under section 151, the Act establishes another
provision, which one can question, but he noted that this is the law at
the moment. He then quoted section 151 of the original Act: “Where on
receipt of a report on a Council, the Secretary of State is satisfied
that a duty or power of a Council is being performed or exercised in an
improper, unlawful or inefficient manner the Secretary of State may in
respect of that duty or power, cause a meeting of the Council to be
called and point out the irregularities found and give the Council any
guidance necessary.” Halifa stressed that this is talking about the
deficiency of the whole Council, not an individual. He added that if it
is found that the whole Council is completely defective, the secretary of
state will rely on subsection (2) of section 151 which states: “
Where the Secretary of State considers that the matter is of a grave
nature, the Secretary of State may institute a commission of inquiry to
look into the matter.” Halifa Sallah pointed out that this is entirely a
different thing! He went on to note that subsection (3) of the same
section 151 states: “Where the findings of a commission of inquiry under
this section disclose that an offence may have been committed, the
Secretary of State shall refer the matter to the president for
appropriate action.” Halifa Sallah was quick to point out that it is
clear why this is the case because the president has authority under the
constitution to establish a commission of enquiry. “So this is really the
essence here. And since that is the case, the president has certain
powers. That is understandable.”
Focus On CEDAW
The Initial, Second And Third Reports Of The Gambia
Article 3
Basic Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and an Equal Basis with Men
This article calls for the guarantee of basis Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedom on an equal basis with men. This of course will
include protection from discriminatory practice. The articles
provide thus:
“State
Parties shall take in all fields, in particular in the political, social,
economic and cultural fields, all appropriate measures, including
legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for
the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and engagement of human
rights and fundamental freedom on a basis of equality with men.” The
article underlines the fact that equality between men and women is a
pre-condition for women’s full engagement of fundamental human rights and
freedoms. Both the 1970 Republican Constitution and the 1997 Second
Republican Constitution contain chapters on protection of fundamental
Rights and Freedoms. However the 1997 Constitution has several
innovative provisions, which were not provided for in the 1970
Constitution. Apart from the protection from discrimination based
on gender (discussed under Article 1) Section 27 and 28 contain two
Rights, which are of utmost and fundamental relevance to the present
article under discussion. They provide thus:
Right
&nb
sp;
Constitutional
Provision
“Right to
Marry”
27. (1) Men and Women of full age and capacity shall have the right to
marry and found a family.
&nb
sp;
&nb
sp;
(2) Marriage shall be based on the freed and full consent of the intended
parties.
“Right of Women to Equality
With
Men
&nb
sp;
28. (1) Women shall be accorded full and equal dignity of the person with
men.
&nb
sp;
&nb
sp;
(2) Women shall have the right to equal treatment with men, including
equal opportunities in political, economic and social activities.
It is however, interesting to note that despite all these constitutional
guarantees and protection, the practical realization of these is
restrained by several factors. In the first place the same
constitution and other relevant laws of The Gambia recognizes the
applicability of customary laws relating to marriage under the customary
law of The Gambia it is not unusual for a woman to be forced in marriage.
Secondly, even though women are accorded full and equal rights with men
under the 1997 constitution; in practice women do experience
discrimination and inequality. This is largely due to the social
set up of The Gambia.
In Gambian society, the traditional roles of women are still recognised
and inequality in the society is taken as given, having been reinforced
by patriarchal nature of our society and the effect of colonialism, which
ensured male domination in decision-making positions. Most women
are dependent as their domain is seen as the home, children and male
partners. There is a general lack of awareness of their self-worth
on the part of many women due to structural constraints reinforcement by
massive illiteracy and ignorance.
However despite these limitations, the provision of these rights in the
constitution should be viewed in a positive light. It is hoped that
once the required level of awareness and empowerment has been attained,
women would be in a position to enforce these rights putting aside all
non-legal social barriers.
Legal Aid and Access to due Process of Law
There is no provision for legal aid in The Gambia. The Gambia
Chapter of the African Society for International and Comparative Law (an
NGO) does offer legal advice and counselling service, but this service
does not specifically address women’s issues. Women being the poorest in
the country cannot afford the payment of legal fees to enforce their
rights. Tremendous assistance is therefore needed to facilitate
their access to redress.
Article 4
Temporary Measures to Achieve Equality
This article recognizes that for women to achieve genuine de facto
equality, it is necessary not only to remove discriminatory barriers, but
also to promote equality by positive action. The Article provides
thus:
1. “Adopting by States Parties of temporary
special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and
women shall not be considered discrimination as defined in the present
convention, but shall in no way entail as a consequence the maintenance
of unequal or separate standards; these measures shall be discontinued
when the objective of equality of opportunity and treatment have been
achieved. 2. Adoption by state parties of
special measures including those measures contained in the present
convention aimed at protecting maturity shall not be considered
discriminatory.” To be continued.
Gambians Abroad Donate Used Hospital Equipment
Below is a statement issued by the President of the Seattle Gambia
Association: The Seattle Gambia Association a non-profit organization
based in Seattle Washington is sending a 40” foot container full of
donated hospital equipment and medical supplies to Royal Victoria
Hospital in Banjul and Bansang Hospital in Central River Division. The
shipment is in line with our efforts as non-profit organization to reach
out to the poor and help local communities in the Gambia improve their
standard of living by sending donated items to hospitals from generous
organisations in the United States. These donations are among a series
of projects that the Seattle Gambia Association committed itself in
reaching out to the poor communities in The Gambia. Among the projects
embarked upon includes:
1. A continuous
Scholarship scheme for Middle School Students straight through high
school (now running for over four years with 14 students sponsored across
the country, with subsequent addition of at least four students annually)
2.
Collection of used hospital equipment from local corporations to be
shipped to the Gambia (First shipment left Seattle May 7, 2004 for RVH
and Bansang Hospital, additional shipments are to follow upon collection
of donated equipment)
3.
Monetary donation to the National Aids Secretariat in the Gambia to help
with the Education, Prevention and the Spread of the Deadly HIV/AIDS
Virus. 4. Donate Wheel
Chairs to the Gambia Red Cross in their efforts to help the local
communities and displaced refugees in the sub-region. It is significant
to note that the Seattle Gambia Association is finance exclusively from
the sacrifice contribution of our members and other fund raising events
conducted by members. The generous contributions of our members have had
an impact in the lives of others, including girls from poor families in
the Gambia who would have otherwise gone without education. We truly
appreciate every effort from all our donors for their continuous support
of this incredible journey to reaching out to others.
According to the President, the Seattle Gambia association is formed by
Gambians in Seattle in 1997and has a membership of over 150 people. Our
mission is to reach out to help relief poverty and improve the standard
of living of our people in the Gambia. We consider ourselves
furniture to be able to give back to our beloved country.
He noted that their goal is to encourage all Gambians in Seattle and the
diaspora to step in and help out in whatever means to alleviate poverty
and suffering on our people. It is time all Gambians ask what they
can do for their people instead of complaining about what government did
not do.
“We have pass the era of solely relying on government for
everything. ordinary citizens and the private sector can immensely
contribute to the socio-economic development of a nation.
I wish to extend my profound gratitude for all Gambians who in one way or
the other contributed towards shipping this container. We look
forward to shipping more containers to the Gambia.
I finally, want to issue a challenge to all Gambians in the diaspora to
sacrifice and help our fellow citizens. The materials or monetary
donation you sent to the Gambia may be helping your own family. Our
families may be okay, but how about those next door neighbors who don’t
have the same opportunity?, how about those little boys and girls whose
parents cannot afford to pay for education? How about those Aids/HIV
victims who have no hope in life whatsoever?”
Bansang Hospital Board Meets to Discuss the Situation
On Monday 19th July 2004, an emergency board meeting was held by the
members of the board of Bansang hospital to redress the situation in the
hospital. The board which consist of five members including the
Chief Executive and the Director of Medical Services, met for more than 7
hours, because the problems to be discussed were the position of the
Administrator which has been vacant for years and the employment of a
Qualified Accountant. The members of the board are Dr. Sam, the
Director of Medical Services, the Commissioner of Central River Division
(CRD), as the board Chairman, Mr. Kebba Sabally of Kuntaur village CRD
North and an NIA Officer in Basse URD, plus the Chief Executive of the
hospital Dr. Jobarteh. Surprisingly enough none of the staff of!
Bansang hospital were among the meeting except Dr. Jobarteh.
However the workers expressed total dissatisfaction on the composition
of the board and have accused the board for not having regard towards
the hospital since they have not met to discuss issues affecting the
hospital for the last 18 months. They accused the board of
inefficiency and gross irresponsibility. However numerous attempts
have been made to rectify these anomalies amicably but the problem
remains daunting due to closing of all avenues for dialogue.
At the close of the meeting by about 10.00 p.m., this reporter tried to
talk to some of the board members but to no avail. This reporter
tried to talk to the Chairman of the Board to shed some light on the
issue but he declined to comment and indicated that he had no comments to
make, as he was very busy to attend The 22nd July celebrations. The
Commissioner directed this reporter to the Chief Executive of the
hospital to get his facts. However when contacted by this reporter,
the Chief Executive indicated to him that he received a call from Banjul,
not to talk to anyone. In another development, the Accountant who
was also listed by the workers to be replaced, indicated to this reporter
that he was a qualified accountant with relevant certificates; that he
was appointed by the board; that before his appointment, he worked at the
Drug Revolving Fund where he was recognised by the Accounts
Department. However, Mr. Fakebba Darboe, the Accountant indicated
that the striking workers have personal grievance against him.
MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*.
--
Chi Jaama
Joe Sambou
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
