Fatoumatta:

I am not talking about supporters of these parties; I am saying that legally, even after the supreme court ruling, these politicla parties still exist. Now, certain members of these parties, for instance KEmemseng, Ousainou, Halifa, Sedia and Hamat are members of NADD, and not their original parties. I know the point you are trying to make, but bottomline all of these parties still exist legally.

Thanks again

Musa JEng
> 
> From: Fatoumata <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2006/02/05 Sun AM 01:36:18 EST
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [>-<] NADD NOT A COALITION BUT A PARTY
> 
> Musa:
> 
> I do understand your arguement. However I am basing my views on the legal
> terms. Officially none of these parties exist anymore. But then as NADD was
> initially meant to be an alliance of parties or a party of parties, I still
> maintain that legally (officially), none of these parties exist. That
> explains why the opposition NAMs lost their seats at the National Assembly
> and had to be re-elected. The legal choice was either to maintain the
> parties or maintain NADD. That's how the Alliance became a party instead of
> a coalition of parties.
> 
> I do understand however, that supporters of NADD are the suporters of the
> different parties that initially formed it. Unofficially, those parties do
> exist. Complex hmmmmm!
> 
> Good luck and Good morning!
> 
> Fatoumata
> 
> 
> On 05/02/06, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > ALL THE PARTY REPRESENTATIVES DECIDED TO MAINTAIN NADD. This means the
> > UDP, PDOIS, NRP, NDAM and PPP ceased to exist. In The Gambia therefore,
> > there are only TWO political parties: NADD and APRC. It is under this ticket
> > that the new NAMs are voted in. Kemeseng is NOT UDP, Halifa is NOT PDOIS,
> > SIDIA too. They are all NADD candidates.
> >
> > Fatoumata:
> >
> > The above statement is not completely accurate. All the above parties you
> > mentioned: NDAM, PPP, UDP,NRP, PDOIS, still exist, including NADD as a
> > political party
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Musa Jeng
> > > From: Fatoumata <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Date: 2006/02/04 Sat PM 09:34:42 EST
> > > To: Gambia Post <[log in to unmask]>,
> > >    The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <
> > [log in to unmask]>
> > > Subject: [>-<] NADD NOT A COALITION BUT A PARTY
> > >
> > > Fellow Gambians,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Allow me to make a stern rectification here that is NOT a coalition but
> > a
> > > Party. NADD can be defined as a party of parties if one wishes but it
> > > changed status once it is decided by the Supreme Courts of The Gambia
> > that a
> > > coalition or an Alliance of parties is not provided for under the
> > electoral
> > > act.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Allow me to recall a little history here. When NADD was formed, the idea
> > was
> > > to bring together all the opposition parties (those that wish to join
> > that
> > > is) and form an alliance. This idea was provoked by Jammeh's decision to
> > > tamper with the constitution and suppress the second round of voting.
> > The
> > > whole idea is, if Jammeh wins by a majority of votes and there is no
> > second
> > > round, he can be re-elected. However, if the opposition parties come
> > > together as one force, the chance is they can beat Jammeh by that
> > majority
> > > vote he is hoping for. Therefore, the coalition came into being. Let us
> > also
> > > remember that the coalition was meant to select a flag bearer who will
> > lead
> > > the nation, in case NADD wins, for a period of five years. During this
> > > period, the flag bearer-president, would not rejoice of any dictatorial
> > > powers whatsoever and a democratic government will be set in motion
> > where
> > > affairs of the state shall be entirely discuss in the principles of fair
> > > play involving the stakeholders, that is the people.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The hitch was Jammeh's counter-attack through the Clerk of the NA. The
> > > opposition MPs lost their seats consequently when it was legally proven
> > that
> > > NADD IS A POLITICAL party and as such those NAMs under a different
> > ticket
> > > should vacate their seats. NADD had two choices to make; be a political
> > > party or break-up as a coalition and return to its former political
> > parties.
> > > ALL THE PARTY REPRESENTATIVES DECIDED TO MAINTAIN NADD. This means the
> > UDP,
> > > PDOIS, NRP, NDAM and PPP ceased to exist. In The Gambia therefore, there
> > are
> > > only TWO political parties: NADD and APRC. It is under this ticket that
> > the
> > > new NAMs are voted in. Kemeseng is NOT UDP, Halifa is NOT PDOIS, SIDIA
> > too.
> > > They are all NADD candidates.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In this light, we should forget saying that one party has more
> > supporters
> > > than another within NADD because it has been mutually agreed that NADD
> > is NO
> > > MORE a coalition or an alliance but a PARTY. Darbo is a member of NADD
> > and
> > > if he resigns, it should be understood that he has resigned as an
> > executive
> > > member of NADD and not as a UDP leader as we have rightly proven that
> > UDP
> > > does not exist anymore. This difference is of utmost importance. UDP can
> > > only exist if it is decided that another party should be created and be
> > > called UDP. It has to go through the whole process of registering.
> > However,
> > > Kemeseng will not lose his seat, as he was not voted in as a NADD
> > candidate.
> > > He can choose to vacate his seat by rejoining the UDP (if ever this
> > break-up
> > > happens) but he can also choose to stay as a NADD candidate. A new UDP
> > would
> > > not necessarilyy be the former one. Darbo has not created the UDP. Quite
> > the
> > > contrary, it was UDP that created Darbo as the party was formed and he
> > was
> > > designated as its leader. His resignation should therefore not be seen
> > as
> > > doomsday for NADD because the decision lies entirely on the former UDP
> > > supporters.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Those of us given support to NADD should rejoice instead of condemning
> > NADD.
> > > The trust we have for the executive should grow stronger day by day.
> > They
> > > have without doubt proven to be quite a democratic party. Contrary to
> > APRC
> > > where there is a one-man show and all he decides is law, NADD has proven
> > the
> > > contrary. They not only believe in dialogue to arrive at decisions but
> > they
> > > have proven that consulting their electorate before any major decision
> > are
> > > taken is one of their fundamental principles. They have adhered to it.
> > > Democracy is more complex than autocracy because before a decision is
> > > reached, particularly on sensitive issues such as selecting a flag
> > bearer,
> > > series of discussions must be carried out and consultations will have to
> > go
> > > on. NADD instead should win our respect and support at this crucial
> > stage.
> > > We wanted NADD to be and it is. If we continue the trend of "assuming"
> > and
> > > "supposing", then we will give the trusted leaders a hard time because
> > we
> > > will be driving them to the corner that we all hope they will not reach
> > only
> > > to condemn them again for reaching there.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > What we should do is suggest the next positive step to take now that
> > Darbo
> > > has resigned from the executive!!!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good luck and Good night!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Fatou
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ?????????????????????????????
> > To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
> > Web interface
> > at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
> >
> > To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
> > http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.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://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤