By Hassoum Ceesay

Exactly 46 years ago this week, our founding President His Excellency Alhaji Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara, GCMRG, made the first visit to Peking, China, by a Gambian Head of State and met the great Chinese leader Chairman Mao. This visit was indeed one of the most memorable and most important diplomatic outings by any Gambian leader since 1965. Through the State Visit to China, President Jawara was able to sign the Technical Cooperation Agreements which continued to define Chinese support to Gambian development efforts in sports, agriculture, health and infrastructure for the next twenty years to 1995, when diplomatic ties were ruptured unceremoniously by the AFPRC Junta. Through this visit, China became a reliable development partner of our Republic.

Jawara’s visit to China from 10-18 June 1975, came only seven months after the establishment of diplomatic ties between Peking and Banjul in November 1974. In a previous article published in April, I had given the context for Banjul severing ties with Formosa(Taiwan) in favour of Peking as a shrewd and pragmatic diplomatic move by the PPP government.

Soon after Banjul-Peking diplomatic ties were established in late 1974, the Chinese Foreign Ministry showed much goodwill and earnestness by sending  one of their experienced diplomats Mr. Chen Shi-Pei, as Charge D’Affaires to Banjul and he took up post late in December 1974, barely six weeks after ties were established. The Gambian Ministry of External Affairs was also quite in earnest; as early as January 1975, Mr. Alhaji A.B Njie, The Gambian Minister of External Affairs led a High Power delegation to Peking on a ‘Special Mission’. In diplomacy, ‘special Missions’ are ‘missions sent abroad to conduct diplomacy with a limited purpose and usually for a limited time’.

The limited purpose for this special mission, which included the powerful Gambian Secretary General and Head of Civil Service Mr Eric Christensen, was to prepare the way for Jawara’s visit to Peking. Other members of the Gambian delegation were Ambassador Ousman Sallah, Dr. L.J Marenah, Director of Agriculture; and the Inspector General of Police, Fred Lloyd-Evans. The Gambian delegation was in Peking from 28 January to 4 February 1975. On the 3 February 1975, Minister Njie signed the protocols for the Technical Cooperation Agreements with his Chinese counterpart, Huan Hua(died 2010). The visit indeed set the ground for President Jawara’s summer visit to China.

Jawara and his delegation arrived Peking on 10 June 1975. The President was accompanied by Ministers S.M Dibba; A.B Njie and L.K Jabang; civil servants M.B Wadda; Dr. J.A Langley and S.Conateh. For the first time in a foreign visit, Jawara took along a whole press corps to Peking including film cameraman E.Sagnia and reporter E.Cole. This signified the importance that Jawara attached to this visit.

The Government owned Gambia News Bulletin had a banner headline: ‘President Leaves for PRC’; in another issue dated 12 June 1975, the same newspaper had another front page lead: ‘President Jawara Given Rousing Welcome in Peking’. Jawara was received at Peking Airport by a posse of high ranking Chinese leaders including Vice Premier Lii Sien-Nien and Wang Chen and the Foreign Minister Hua. ‘A grand welcome ceremony was held for The Gambian Leader at Peking Airport where he also reviewed a Guard of Honour mounted by the Peoples’ Liberation Army corps’, said a story in Xinhua, the China news agency.

A further testimony for the importance that the Chinese authorities attached to this visit was the fact that Jawara was given the opportunity to visit Chou En Lai(died 1976), the famous Premier and diplomat of China, who was at the time was sick. Jawara went to see him at his hospital bed, and according to Xinhua, the two leaders spoke for 30 minutes, and were both satisfied with the talks.

At a big banquet held for The Gambian delegation at the Great Hall of the People in Peking, Jawara took a toast for the health of Chairman Mao, the Chinese leader, who at this time was also out of sorts. Speaking at this banquet before dozens of foreign diplomats and the Chinese Communist Party functionaries, Jawara said these famous and prophetic words which continue to define China-Gambia special ties:

‘China-Gambia relations have been developing by leaps and bounds since the establishment of diplomatic ties between the two countries. China is a member of the Third World; and we the rest of the Developing Countries are happy to have China as a partner for development as there is a lot we could learn from her development techniques, especially for us in The Gambia, agric expansion schemes, infrastructure and light industries’ The Gambia News Bulletin, 17 June 1975.

Later the next day in Peking Jawara signed agreements worth D13 million for the construction of a sports stadium, which became known as the independence Stadium and Friendship Hostel, and two hospitals, which were later rewired as six health centres at Fagikunda, Kaur, Yorobawol, Kuntaur etc.  Jawara heeded advice from his health experts that at this time what The Gambia needed were not huge hospitals notorious for their specialization, but small health centre able to respond to the immediate health needs of the people of our Republic! It was thanks to these Chinese built major health centres that the Primary Health Care(PHC) became a Gambian success stories. Thanks to the Chinese built Independence Stadium which was opened in 1983, Gambian sports have developed by leaps and bounds so to say. Jawara also signed an agreement to increase the number of China Rice Experts in the country from 32 to 45 to help increase rice acreage in the country. Indeed, there is still a rice variety in The Gambia which is called ‘chinese’ introduced in the late 1970s by the Chinese rice experts in parts of the Maccarthy Island Division.

Jawara visited Nanking, Shanghai and Yunchow cities to see China’s Great Leap Forward projects. In fact, so impressed was the Gambian leader with China that told reporters that ‘China is one giant construction site’; he and delegation also visited The Great Wall, and the rice schemes along the Yangtse River: ‘President Jawara Impressed by Chinese Agric Schemes’ read a headline in a Banjul paper.

Jawara was hugely impressed by Chairman Mao, the leader of the China. After a closed door meeting with the ailing revolutionary, Jawara spoke highly of Chairman Mao: ‘the force of his personality is still evident. On meeting him, you are in no doubt whatsoever, that this is the man who has played such a tremendous role in bringing about a great revolution in the lives of 800,000,000 people of China-a country that had for long suffered considerably at the hands of the invaders, colonialists and imperialists and has suffered all sorts of tribulations, from famine to repression until their great revolution under the leadership Chairman Mao have thrown away the yoke of feudalism and imperialism and famine. Chairman Mao is a great unifier; who has been able to make his words and thoughts the words and thoughts of the many millions in China. China is a great nation to be reckoned with in every way in the future’, The Gambia News Bulletin, 28 June 1975.

In July 1975, First Lady Chilel opened a photo exhibition on Jawara’s famous visit to Peking at The Gambia National Library which attracted a big audience; another indication of the strong ties between The Gambia-China.

Jawara visit to Peking in the summer of 1975 was a watershed moment in Gambian diplomatic history. Jawara and delegation had their eyes wide open to see the Chinese strides to transform their country from a backwater to the world superpower, self sufficient in food, for example, within 25 years from 1949. Through this summer visit, the foundation blocks for China-Gambia mutual relations were laid, and as the ties continue to thrive today, we need to reflect on this famous trip by Jawara to Peking. China inspired Jawara as a country committed to raising the lives of her people from hardship and protecting her sovereignty from invaders. When he returned, Jawara reinvigorated his famous and very useful ‘tesito’ or self-help philosophy through which Gambians were mobilized into patriotic action to develop schools, causeways and roads in their communities in search for autarchy. The Gambia will continue to inspire China for her peace and stability and goodwill.

Hassoum Ceesay, noted historian and author was alumni 2018 Seminar on Think-tanks for English-speaking African Countries, Zhejiang Normal University,  Zhejiang Province, China

By Madi Jobarteh

To start with, there should be no attestation for the purpose of obtaining a voter’s card. This is because only citizens are required to vote. Citizens acquire a birth certificate and a national ID card as the primary legal evidence of citizenship status. But an attestation only confirms if one was born in a particular locality. Yet to be born in any part of the Gambia does not necessarily confer citizenship as prescribed in the Constitution. Secondly an attestation cannot determine the age of person. Hence attestation could potentially enable a non-Gambian and an under-aged person to obtain a voter’s card which is unconstitutional and illegal. Therefore, attestation as a means to obtain voters card should be abandoned.

The Elections Act in Section 12(2)(e) amended in 2001 provided that either a birth certificate, ID card, passport or an attestation should be produced in order to register. For an attestation, it stated that it should be signed by an alkalo of a village or a seyfo of a district. Clearly this provision has not mentioned a mayor or a chairperson and indeed any other public official. Therefore, no mayor or chairperson, councillor or National Assembly Member could assume that power on his own. IEC cannot also confer such authority on any other person other than an alkalo and seyfo.

Yes, Banjul and Kanifing Municipality have mayors. But in the case of Banjul particularly, there is no neighbourhood of the city that has an alkalo or seyfo. Thus, on a logical basis, and in order not to disenfranchise some people, one may argue that the IEC could allow the mayor to assume the function of giving attestation. One can argue that the IEC could take this decision based on Section 127 of the Elections Act which has empowered the IEC to resolve issues not addressed in the Act based on natural justice and fairness. One can even go further to cite Section 134(2) which gives power to IEC to make rules for the better carrying out of the provisions of the elections law.

I do not think one can depend on the above provisions to make the mayor give attestations, nor can we assume that the fact that there was no expressed provision for that purpose, such power could be derived or implied. Where and how is that power implied from? Is it just because Banjul has no alkalo or seyfo? Or is it that because failure to give attestation may disenfranchise some people? True and legitimate as those concerns maybe, they are still inadequate to give power to the mayor to give attestation.

I do not think the mayor or anyone can change a substantive provision by adding or reducing it just to take care of what was not addressed originally. For example, the law identified a birth certificate, ID card or passport as one of the documents necessary to register, but it did not mention a driver’s license. Therefore, under no circumstance could the IEC add a driver’s license to the list just because one may not have all of the above documents for any reason.

We must bear in mind that the fact that there is a specified list of documents means that the law drafters and lawmakers knew what they wanted. The lawmakers, who are in fact from political parties knew there was a city called Banjul which has neither an alkalo nor a chief. They did not forget nor were they ignorant of that fact, hence we cannot correct that issue now by the mayor giving attestation. That, to me, would defeat the purpose of sections 127 and 134 as well as effectively give unlimited power to the IEC to practically change any provision in the Elections Act.

I hold that sections 127 and 134 give such powers as to enable IEC to address operational and administrative issues for the purpose of better implementation of the provisions of the law. But sections 127 and 134 cannot give the power to IEC to make substantive changes to any provision which would tantamount to making the IEC a lawmaker. Hence if the IEC can add a mayor to the list of persons who can give attestation then IEC is amending that provision (Section 12.2.e) for which it has no powers to do so. Therefore, there is no basis for the Mayor of Banjul to give attestations.

In making this observation it is also necessary to state that this unfortunate scenario only highlights, once again the failure of political leadership ranging from the Executive to the Legislature to political parties and IEC. The practice of attestation was first introduced in the laws in 2001. But on 17 June 2015, the Gambia Opposition for Electoral Reforms (GOFER) submitted a 12-point document in which the removal of attestations was one of the key demands. They perceived attestation as fraudulent. In the document, this is how they put it,

“The Opposition endorsed the IEC’s recommendation to the National Assembly for electoral law review to exclude Attestation Forms from the documents that are to be forwarded to the Registration Officers during registration of voters to determine citizenship and the request to re-introduce the screening of registration applicants by registering officers.”

GOFER was constituted in 2012 by GMC, GPDP, NRP, PDOIS, PPP and UDP and they submitted their demands in 2015 jointly to the President, IEC Chair, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Chief Justice, the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, the Secretary General, as well as to the UN, AU, EU, ECOWAS, US Secretary of State and Rev. Jesse Jackson. Wow! The issue of attestation has been a very longstanding contentious issue. For example, the Commonwealth election observation mission noted in their observation report on the 2011 presidential election that opposition parties and CSOs had raised the issue with them that the practice was prone to abuse.

Therefore, one wonders how come the issue of attestation still remains in the law when these GOFER parties were the ones that formed a coalition to remove the former regime. Most of them are currently key members in both the Executive and the Legislature. In 2017, when they amended the electoral law to reduce the cost of nomination, why did they not also remove attestation altogether as a long-held concern? Even in the Elections Bill 2020, one can find attestation still there! Why?

Therefore, none of these parties and indeed the IEC has any moral authority to support or oppose attestation today because they had the opportunity to change it since 2017. Why did they refuse to do so? Rather, what is manifesting is the utter failure and lack of political will by the President, political parties and their leaders and the National Assembly. They have demonstrated that they are good at only rhetoric and showmanship but they lack any commitment to the true transformation of this country into a true democracy and good governance.

Just as it is with attestation so also is the same poor leadership they have shown when it comes to diaspora voting. While they all love to pontificate about the right of Gambians abroad to register and vote yet no party or its leader, neither the Government nor IEC has shown any genuine interest or taken any practical step to make it happen. Otherwise the diaspora would have registered and voting since a decade ago!

Stand up and speak up to hold political party leaders accountable!

For The Gambia Our Homeland

By Madi Jobarteh

What is the purpose of Pres. Barrow’s visit to Guinea-Conakry? The press release from State House is not only scanty but highly misleading which is confirmed by what Barrow told his host! In the videos circulating, Barrow is seen sitting with Pres. Alpha Conde saying that he came to learn from Conde, a man who is notorious for undermining his country’s constitution just to continue to grip power, regardless of how many of his citizens were killed!

It is utterly unbelievable that a President of a whole country would visit another President of another country in order to learn from the host. Presidents do not embark on study tours at all. If Barrow needed to learn anything, indeed the resources, competence and personalities exist in The Gambia for him to utilize to know what he needed to know since 2017.

Thus for Pres. Barrow to wait until the eve of the end of his tenure to travel to a fellow president to sit at his feet asking to learn is indeed the highest insult to national sovereignty and dignity. Nowhere in international relations would a sitting President go to another President to claim to learn from the host.

President Barrow must understand that he carries at all times the collective dignity, sovereignty and power of the Gambian people and their Republic. Hence for him to submit himself to any other person or country or entity on earth other than the People of The Gambia is treasonable. By his actions and words in Conakry, Pres. Barrow has surrendered our sovereignty to a foreign country. He has no powers whatsoever to do such and he should be held accountable.

Barrow must understand that international relation is based on the sovereign equality of nations. This is non-negotiable. No mater how powerful and rich and influential one country or its president is, it does not have any more equality than the smallest, poorest or less influential country or its president on earth!

For example, no matter it’s power and influence the United States of America does not have more sovereignty over and above The Gambia! They all have one vote each! For that matter, the President of The Gambia cannot perceive the President of the United States as big sister or big brother or father or mother or teacher to learn from. This is why Presidents refer to each other as ‘colleague’ or ‘friend’. There is no big or small President!

I recall even the despicable tinpot dictator Yaya Jammeh would refer to former Senegalese Pres. Abdoulaye Wade as ‘brother’. Yet Wade can be a father to Jammeh and far more educated. But despite his criminality, Jammeh knew as far as international diplomacy was concerned that the age and education of Wade is irrelevant! President is just President!

The fact that one is compelled as a last resort to use Jammeh as an example in itself tells how much Pres. Barrow is equally betraying and misleading The Gambia like his predecessor!

Therefore for Adama Barrow to bundle himself all the way to Conakry to ask that dishonest leader Alpha Conde to teach him is indeed the highest insult inflicted on a sovereign nation. The National Assembly must call the President to order for this gross blunder at the international level!

The fact that we are at the eve of the presidential election while the TRRC is about to hand over its final report to Barrow should generate legitimate concerns about this dubious visit. We know that Alpha Conde is not an honest leader who subverted democracy by changing the country’s constitution in order to legitimatize his grip on power. Also, knowing that Conde is a Jammeh ally and ready to shield him from accountability, it begs the question as to what is Barrow discussing with Conde behind closed doors!

Above all, why would the President go to spend three days in Guinea? What is the national interest he is pursuing in Conakry? State House must know that they have a duty to be transparent to Gambians!

Therefore whatever the President is doing anytime and anywhere must be fully disclosed to citizens on time. If they cannot disclose such information for national security reasons, citizens must be told accordingly. But the statement from State House about this visit is vague, misleading and unacceptable.

Therefore the National Assembly must summon the President to question him about this visit. In a normal democracy and with good leadership, the President should have informed the parliament about the national objectives he is pursuing with this visit. There is a standing committee on foreign relations in the National Assembly which must ensure that they get the full details of this dubious visit! I hope our NAMs will stand up this time to salvage the country from the uncountable embarrassing actions of this President.

We the citizens need to know why President Barrow went to Guinea-Conakry for three good days with such a large entourage. What is the cost of this visit? How much is The Gambia gaining from this visit? We need to know.

For The Gambia ?? Our Homeland

There are many things about President Adama Barrow’s Guinea trip but the one thing it has gravely put on view is just how unserious he is about the job of president.

I was on my way to work when the road was cleared for the president to pass. He was on his way to the airport – and I was around Westfield when his motorcade went past me. While the president was busy waving at the few people who appeared interested in seeing him, I was busy thinking what on this very large earth is so special for him to visit Guinea and spend three long days there.

State House did not give much of the president’s Guinea trip. It only talked about bilaterals, the president touring sites and meeting Gambians.

Whatever President Barrow wants to do in Guinea, can be done within a day. If you take bilaterals, this takes nothing more than five hours on the part of serious world leaders. Another thing President Barrow also engages in wherever he travels is meeting Gambians. Both activities can be performed in less than a day.

The president needs to be a little bit more serious about some of the trips he makes. A few weeks ago, he announced he was travelling to Dubai to meet a private citizen. What serious president in this world does that?

But then I’m not entirely sure if State House is really honest about the president’s trip. Alpha Conde played a key role in having Jammeh leave power. While Conde and Jammeh aren’t the best of friends, reports abound their wives are related. Having the TRRC just ending and the president embarking on this trip is highly suspect and will only trigger questions whether this trip is in fact not about Jammeh.

Guinea is not a country where Gambia has any special interests in, so spending a massive three days there as a leader is the height of idleness.