Hi Kebba!
                Sorry for not replying earlier. You wrote:

''When I said that the PDOIS and NCP will be treated in the way they deserve by me, you should have asked yourself what these Parties deserve before you conclude that such an utterance is a 'mistake detrimental to the cause of the opposition'. For all you know, PDOIS might 'deserve' the support of the Alliance if certain things were to chance. ''

Thanks for the clarification.  Maybe I jumped the gun but when you drew the line and said that PDOIS and NCP are not part of the alliance and will therefore be treated the way they deserve, I saw it as a 'mistake detrimental to the cause of the opposition'.

You also wrote:

''I don't know whether you have been reading my mails thoroughly. Otherwise, you would not ask me whether I think that PDOIS' and NCP's decisions about the Alliance is written in stone or not. How many times did I appeal to NCP and PDOIS supporters to engage their leaders to try and change their decisions? 

I didn't miss your appeal. That is why I quoted one and said that's the spirit. It is however difficult to fathom your appealing to us to engage our leaders in one sentence and drawing the battle lines and castigating PDOIS and NCP in the other. That is why I said we should avoid doing the APRC's job free of charge. No, I am not accusing you of anything but if PDOIS and NCP supporters had also drawn the line and engaged in PPP, UDP castigation, we would be unwittingly doing the APRC's job. We would in the process be wasting valuable time and effort.

As to the question of blame for the loss of the alliance, you wrote:

''The Alliance because they did not send PDOIS a 'proper' invitation to the Meeting?''

As you alluded, each is entitled to his opinion on this question and I definitely agree with you. That is why I found it difficult to understand how PDOIS and NCP can be blamed for the alliance's loss if it should happen. As to the issue of the meeting, I was saddened when I read I read the NRP deputy's statement in the article forwarded by Beran Jeng. The relevant portion reads: 

"According to Honourable Njadoe, NRP had never been informed that an inter-party meeting would be held at the YMCA building on Monday, August 13 by the opposition
parties. He said he met Mr Omar A Jallow (OJ) the week before in Banjul who
informed him that such a meeting was to be held at the Independence Stadium
but because of the absence of the NRP leader, Hamat Bah, it would be
postponed till further notice. "I am just hearing that they have had the
meeting finally. I do not know what topic they raised at the meeting," Mr
Njadoe added that the NRP had not been informed of such a meeting. " 

We have to admit that procedural errors have been made and no matter how insignificant to us as individual, they have resulted in the creation of mistrust among the parties concerned. It is therefore not only PDOIS that is claiming that they were not invited to the meeting. The NRP is also claiming the same. I don't think there is any party in the world that would allow itself to be bound by decisions in which it has equal interest but at the negotiation of which it was not present.

You wrote:

'' I hope by now you have engaged your Party to convince them to rethink their position and join the Alliance. Guess not!, because like Jassey-Conteh, you are waiting for 'official word' from them. "

Yes. I was waiting for the official word not only from PDOIS but also from the NCP and NRP. There is always more than one side to every conflict and I have learnt a long time ago never to rely on one side to make an informed decision. That is why I was cautious not to draw any conclusion before hearing the other sides.

You also wrote:

"On your hypothetical about a Sidia Jatta or a SM Dibba candidacy, I guess the only thing I can say is that you have a lot to learn about me. " 

I know you are a man of your words. You will be truly, truly, truly surprised.


I am glad that the door is still open for the other parties. Many seem to be preoccupied with the leadership of the alliance. There are many other important issues. While I support PDOIS' suggestion for a neutral woman to be presented as the presidential candidate, I will gladly support Darboe's candidacy on condition that he agrees to an interim mandate. The purpose will be create a level playing field to give the Gambian voters the right to choose who they will without any form of hindrances. Allow me to quote from Foroyaa:

"A one year term by a coalition presidential candidate should be sufficient to open the national media for civic education to enlighten the people in the country so that they will no longer be susceptible to any form of intimidation or patronage, eradicate all provisions which impose unreasonable and unjustifiable restrictions on any one from exercising his or her political and civic rights, open up the national media to every political party on a weekly basis to put their programmes to the people without insults or
promotion of any sectionalist form of politics.... The reorientation of security forces, the establishment of a complaints commission to settle grievances and the concerted
utilisation of the powers of the courts to provide redress would provide a
cornerstone for a genuine democratic society. Standards would have been set
for the emergence of a new political order. New presidential and National Assembly elections could be held for any party to seek the mandate of the people on the basis of its own merit. A one year transition programme which will not allow any personality or
party to entrench itself and which will be designed to build the democratic
instruments, institutions, structures and practices that would make free
and fair elections possible, so as to come up with the undiluted choice of
the people, should provide the basis for a coalition."  

Would you not agree that the above plus other contributions from UDPand others geared towards giving the Gambian people the true democratic right to choose their leaders would be a good foundation for the alliance. There are therefore many other issues apart from the presidential candidates and this is where negotiation and compromise come into play. Let the parties call another meeting. Let them put all their positions on the table. Let them negotiate. If PDOIS loses on some of its proposals, it gains somewhere else. Same goes for the UDP. If at the end of the day, Darboe is not the interim presidential candidate, I bet there are many issues that the UDP have apart from the presidential candidate that they will gain. Same goes for the other parties. At the end of the day, a compromise will hopefully be reached that will accomodate the parties and be the foundation for a true and genuine alliance. Thanks.
                                                                                                                                Buharry.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------