Friends,
just a short comment, which I hope other people on this list can enlighten a
bit. I know that we have people who have studied law here. So please
elaborate on my comment.
Iīm very surprised if itīs so, that The Gambia can put a law in action,
which works retrograde.
Itīs a principle in all law-making, that a law is not in action until itīs
been published. And itīs a principle that a law can not cover, meet the
demands of action taken place, before the law is put into action by
publishing it. That means that a law can not cover situations back in time,
before the law was made. Itīs simple because every person has the right to
know if his doings, actions are under a law, is law-abiding or law-breaking.
Else you can establish a law under which people can be brought to court for
actions, which when they did so was not against any law. If you can put laws
into action which works backward or retrograde , you can not as a citizen
protect yourself from what could come up in the future.
So even an Indemnity Act passed and published can in my opinion never
cover actions before the moment itīs published.
Else itīs normal in all democracies, that the head of state, the government
and parliament members are under an indemnity act. But itīs also normal that
if they commit a crime according to the criminal law or so (driving over
speed-limit, drive when drunken, steal, murder, etc., ) their indemnity is
always "lifted" by the parliament, so they can be brought to order, even to
court. Indemnity is only for political reasons, to secure and protect them,
so they can handle all political cases without being brought to court by the
next government, or whenever the political climate change. Therefor the
indemnity never covers other persons than the above mentioned. Military,
police, public servants can never be protected by an indemnity law. They are
"protected" because they normally act or work on "order". If they are asked
to do something which is not legal under any law, they have their right to
reject, protest. But if they are forced or ordered, that will be taken into
consideration in an eventual law suit. And if the "orders given" can be
traced backwards one will try to establish a law suit based on that. Normal
crimes are not to be protected against. Whenever they have taken their
punishment itīs up to the parliament, and the people to decide whether they
are worthy to take a position, a seat, or be voted into the parliament as a
representative of the people.
Asbjørn Nordam
>
> This came from the Independent Paper. Read on...
>
> Gov't amends Indemnity Act Backdates it to January 2000
>
> A draft bill entitled "an Act to amend the Indemnity Act and for matters
> connected therewith" signed by the Secretary of State for the Interior and
> Religious Affairs Ousman Badjie has been gazetted for presentation to the
> National Assembly for enactment. According to the gazette, "This Act may be
> cited as the Indemnity (Amendment) Act 2001 and shall be deemed to have come
> into force on 1st January, 2000".
>
> Forwarded by Essa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
