Jabou,
I do not know how you came to the conclusion that I will "launch at you
with machetes held high for addressing" Halifa's role during the transition.
Far from your perception, I welcome your contribution. I only attacked you
because instead of showing why you think we are wrong on Halifa, you went
gung-ho calling us "cronies of the new political class." Now this was
misconstrued and very unfair because you don't know me. If you are the good
Muslim sister that you project yourself online to be, then you would have
realised your gaffe and you would humble yourself by apologising to us.
Contrary to your notion, I don't know you so I have nothing personal against
you. It would be very foolish of me to hate you when I don't even know you.
It would really help us all if you contextualise your arguments. That way
we would be in a good position to ascertain if you had brought the wrong
charge sheet to the wrong address. Having said that, I shall address your
points in the interest of an intelligent debate as you put it.
Your first concern was why I shelved "all the responsibilities" of the
current state of affairs of the Gambia. You wrote: "the responsibility being
heaped on Halifa gives the impression that this guy is mightier than anyone
in our country, as if his acceptance or rejection of the Constitution could
have stopped what has been unfolding in our country." Now it certainly would
have helped if you had quoted where I said that Halifa should bear "all
responsibilities" for what is happening in the Gambia. If you go back to my
posting of 18/01/00, you would observe that I wrote "of course it would be
wholly unfair to contend that it was Halifa and CO's who should take blame
for Jammeh's treachery. This is unfair. Of course unlike Jammeh, Halifa has
no standing army, has no dipping pot to splash cash for his chosen cause or a
militia to carry machetes to carry out his orders." Clearly you had
misconstrued my position and was jumping at shadows when you alleged that I
had shelved all responsibilities on Halifa's shoulders and by such act, had
attributed superman qualities to him.
My judgement that "IF ANY INDIVIDUAL VOICE IN THE PUBLIC REALM BEARS A
MEASURE OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE TRAGIC INVERSION OF PRIORITIES AS THE
GAMBIA SLID TOWARDS THE ABYSS, IT WOULD BE HIS" [note the emphasis], does not
confuse rulers with powers of political decision over the action of States,
and writers with influence on public opinion. Heads of government do not act
as individuals, and are not mere voices. They command massive material
resources. Halifa is not clearly a head of a state. As it happened, no INDIVID
UAL VOICE IN THE PUBLIC REALM during the transition, called outspokenly and
repeatedly as Halifa for adherence to a bogus process so-called a transition
to democratic rule, the eligibility of Jammeh's candidature even though
Jammeh would be both player and referee at the same time or vouchschafe a
flaw ridden constitution that was tailor-made for him [Jammeh] to tighten his
grip on power. This is my contention. And since all these aforementioned
issues metaphorsed into the present quagmire of our country, it is safe to
repeat without any fear of exaggeration or libellous intent my assertion
that: "if any individual voice in the public realm bears a measure of
responsibility for the tragic inversion of priorities as the Gambia slid
towards the abyss, it would be his." Do you disagree? It is your prerogative
to disagree.
Also, you did ask a lot of rhetorical imperative questions. Since they
are too many to answer here, I shall devote my attention to the most
demanding ones. You asked: "could his [Halifa's presumably] condemnation of
Yaya Jammeh's desire to run for office have stopped Yaya from running?"
Probably not. Why did I upbraid Halifa for supporting or seeing nothing wrong
with Jammeh's candidature? Simple. How can an election be free and fair when
one of the players is at the same time a referee; hell bent on installing
himself as president at all cost? No wonder Halifa never condemned the 1996
election as unfair and unfree except when I had to force it from his lips
online in this forum. So are you saying like Halifa that there is absolutely
nothing wrong with Jammeh being referee and player at the same time? Let me
know your thoughts on that. I thought I had made it abundantly clear that
Jammeh as a citizen of the Gambia, notwithstanding his military past, can
stand for the presidency so long as he is eligible under the rules of the
Gambia. There is world of a difference between him being both player and
referee and an independent individual seeking the office of President. There
can be no free and fair elections under such a set up. This is the point.
Matter of fact of, the National Consultative Committee, recommended a care
taker care administration that will see to the end of the transition because
it had the foresight to see that Jammeh [the ruler/incumbent] running for
office would have all the stench of player being referee at the same time.
Predictably, Jammeh expunged this recommendation from our midst because it
was clearly not in his interest. This in effect makes ineligibility a case.
Unbelievably, our learned friend Halifa, begs to differ.
The final question I will tackle from you will be what you refer to as
your million dollar question for me. You asked: "Do we really have the kind
of atmosphere in the Gambia right now where a move to impeach the President
will be undertaken diligence on behalf of the people by those elected to
represent us?" Probably not. I did not make much of a noise about the
so-called new vocal non-partisan National Members or the equally vacuous
aggrandised theme "democratic space." Halifa did. So I reasoned that if the
"democratic space" is such as Halifa thinks it is then why are the new vocal
non-partisan National Assembly members not proceeding with impeachment
hearings when clearly impeachable offences appear to have been made. It
should be you and Halifa who should be explaining why your assertions
contradict the current political nous. Do you agree with Halifa that indeed
our "democratic space" has been widened to new levels unheard of in the
History of our country?
Further you contemplated that: "no doubt some will speak up and come
forward, but where will their efforts lead in the face of a government that
has demonstrated that they do not necessarily have to abide by the law in
their efforts to get what they want?" Jabou, Jabou, my good sister; need I
remind you that better your voice be heard at the right moment on the right
issue? Even if Halifa's voice would be disregarded, it is better he speak up
for tomorrow's sake than forever keep his silence on the inexcusable premise
of his voice not being heeded by the current regime. For there will always be
tomorrow. And tomorrow will ask which voices spoke for the People at the
right time. This is the point. Forget being ignored by Jammeh, say what is
the truth and your conscience shall set you free. You prowl the corridors of
Gambia-L everyday upbraiding Jammeh. Does even he listen to you? Will that
make you stop saying the truth? I hope you get it.
On the desk I'm writing this, is a straw poll I conducted after I started
this debate with Halifa. Of the 21 Gambians I polled in the Southeast and
Greater London Area of England, some 85% said they either voted for PDOIS or
would have done so if they had voted in 1992. Today only a tiny fraction
would still vote for them. Of that 85% only 20% still think they can trust
PDOIS. When I asked why the sudden change of heart. They all repeat the Koro
case and the 1997 constitution. They all keep on saying that the PDOIS of pre
1994/5 is not the same PDOIS of today. If you think my compatriots and I are
part of a lunatic fringe then both you and Halifa are mistaken. PDOIS is in a
mess and it would take a major miracle to win back the support it has lost
from it's traditional supporters which are primarily the youths [18-35 ranges
of age]; what is dubbed the post independence generation. I certainly don't
have much taste for psephology I cite it here for you to get the message that
many young people out there share the views I express herein.
Frankly I was hoping that the next time I write about Halifa would be
when I debunk his misconceptions on the Indemnity Clause. I hope I have
answered your concerns. This debate has gone for too long and to the point of
ad nauseaum. We are merely stretching and repeating what had been said
before. Really we all should be invigorating our energies and resources on
what could possibly lead to redemption of our hijacked country.
Good Morning
Hamjatta Kanteh
hkanteh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
