I wish to interject in this discour about rights and make some observations that I hope would help further this debate. In am with the conviction that this subject about human rights should be the central preoccupation of all Gambians, after all it is the guarantee of rights that asserts the human dignity. If ever we trivialise or ignore our rights or allow anybody to deny it to us we would be committing a fatal historical mistake which could tantamount to societal suicide. Central to human struggle' is humanization,this has always been central and humanization without safeguarding of rights is inconceivable. People have lost lives. limbs property and even freedom to ensure that rights are protected, hence the significance of safeguarding rights cannot be over-emphasised. That is why we must not allow semantics to to blur it's significaqnce. In as much as we may agree or disagree about personalities, the one fundamental issue that should bind all of us should be our dettermination and resillience to defend the just and fight against the unjust. The unjust and the just cannot be RELATIVE, there has to be standard universal norms and values that are agreeable to all societies irrespective of geo-political settings, dignity in the US and Mongolia or Saudi should mean one thing. Hence to attempt to maje distinctions about places and opeople is both futile and irrational. That was why just people all over the world were disgusted with the Taliban equally just people all over the world were disgusted the way the US was treating the Taliban captives. This the way justice must be it has to be universally acknowleged and applied. This why it is false to castigate Jammeh only to excuse Jawara, a just person would try to figure out Jawara's wrongs and and abhore in as much as Jammeh would be. Hence the whole equation with regard to Gambia we are yet to finde a regime that is dispensing justice. Not wishing to make a political point but stating a fact, I can recall an in-law of mine called Baboucarr Langley whose only crime was to make a one man demonstration hoisting a flag at an Independence parade shouting "the people are tired, we want change". He wwas forced to confess that he was mad so that they can release him he refused and was imprisioned, at the time he had two lovely twin children only one month old, due to the stress and pain my sister was going through one of the twin passed out barely another month the other one followed, so how can anyone in their right frame of mind say this was justice. The difference between then and now is there is more media reporting hence nothing goes under the carpet and rightly so. Under Jammeh all in London can testify to this I was at the centre demonstrating when the APRC regime murdered our brothers and sisdters my aqssertion is that we must cease comparing and attack both of them for they are all guilty to the way they handled Gambian rights. To try to exonerate officers that were manifestly oppressive or potray them as heroes is an affront to our intelligence. Win the way we treat each other. To achieve this standarddization of agreeable norms is what brought about UNIVERSAL TREATIES, these treaties albeit not perfect serves as a bench mark to ensure a more fairer way of treating each other. The culmination of such treaties were not accidental but something that had pre-occupied academics and intellectuals for decades, hence to invent the term human rights has never been an hiswtorical accident but it is part and parcel of the struggle for humanity in search of equitable treatmen. Eventhough the concept dates way further than the time frame I will be dealing with, this period has great significance and influence. The institutions that govern the way we deal with each other has been central to the protection of our rights, hence their evolution. From very early in this period the concept of egality has been recognised hence requiring political imprint to ensure its practical enforcement and applicability. But to the disenchantment of many the whole concept was at the time premised around utilitarianism, in which case minority rights were never considered, what says the majority prevailed irrepective of whatever negative consequencies resulted. The whole notion of the liberal concept of rights was defeated, and this was because an antecedent to liberalism held sway. The liberal concepts of rights can be seen to owe it's antecedents to the school 0f so-called cotractarians which found perhaps it's earliest advocate in the writings of John Locket (THE SECCOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT 1698). Locke imagined an actual social contract between individuals and the state at the setting up of civil society in which citizens, in order to secure the protection handed over certain powers, most importantly a monopoly of coercive force, to the government in return for the guarantee of certain rights to lives, liberties and estates To deal with this subject we must have to make a deep historical reflection otherwiswe we will just be gyrating in platitudes and never come to an agreeable conclusion. >From: Ebou Jallow <[log in to unmask]> >Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list ><[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: Human Rights and the Gambian Polity >Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:46:17 -0400 > >George and Ebrima...Please refer to my earlier statements: > >1. “Now how does this mean within contemporary Gambia? I would >caution that this is a very mangling question, and one has to walk the >fine line of objectivity to avoid the potential sways of current >factional politics. At best we can expect to demonstrate the essence >of human rights within our socio-economic experience and leave the rest >to legitimate politics to interpret.” > > >2. “I would like to establish here that my previous article is >just a groundwork of ideas that I think might incite very fruitful >solutions to human rights issues in the Gambia. Let me emphasize >again that my opinion is purely apolitical, and I try as much as >possible to avoid specific trends or facts in the Gambia that might >embroil the discussions into a partisan debate.” > >Nevertheless, I will assume that the above statements are crystal clear >unless you raise a specific question that is quite inherently >impertinent. I believe this may help us avoid going around circles. > >Finally, Ebrima again there are alot of tangential issues you raised in >your last response that I believe have absolutely no positive bearing >to this discourse. For example, your posture without any concrete >demonstration and I will quote you-“ The fact of the matter is you >loaded your piece with revolutionary thinking of philosophers, the very >purpose of whose arguments were completely misrepresented at the tail >end of your previous posting.” > >You know Ebrima I wish you could prove your case. Now putting all this >human rights debate aside for a moment, I believe regressing into the >past to excavate ugly memories shall only serve to stymie the >therapeutic effects of reconciliation. What is done can never be >undone. The abuse excuse game plan is over. >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L >Web interface >at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html >To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: >[log in to unmask] > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: [log in to unmask] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~