Saturday, August 2, 2025
Home Blog Page 674

Fundamental beliefs of the Ahmadiyyah or Qadianiyyah

 

Following the recent infamous incident at the Talinding cemetery which has unfortunately galvanised a lot of ignorant and uninformed utterances from many pseudo religious authorities on the social media platforms, I am compelled to debunk some mysteries surrounding this very controversial issue. Most of us should understand that Islam is clearly defined and as such only folks with the right accreditation and authority should engage in such discourses and not reduce it to a debate of philosophical ideas or modernity. In this piece, I will endeavour to shed light on some radical beliefs of this group comparative to mainstream Islamic beliefs.

 
The founder of this group (Ghulam Ahmad) systematically transformed himself from a caller to Islam to a “Mujaddid” (revivalist) inspired by Allah to the claim of being the Promised Messiah (Mahdi) and then finally to be most ludicrous –claiming to be prophet whose prophet hood was higher than that of Muhammad (PBUH). They also believe that prophet hood did not end with Muhammad (PBUH), but that it is ongoing, and Allah sends a messenger when there is a need, and that Ghulam Ahmad is the best of all the prophets.

 
They believe that the Angel Jibreel used to come down to Ghulam Ahmad and he used to bring revelation to him, and that his inspirations are like the Quran.

 
They say there is no Quran other than what the “Promised Messiah” (Ghulam Ahmad) brought, and no hadeeth except what is in accordance with his teachings, and no Prophet except under the leadership of Ghulam Ahmad. They also believe their book was revealed. Its name is al kitaab al-Mubeen and it is different from the Holy Quran.

 
They believe that Qadian (the birth place of its founder in Punjab, India) is like Makkah and Madeenah, if not better than them, and that its land is sacred.
In their view every Muslim is Kaafir unless he becomes a Qadiani, and everyone who married a non Qadinani is also kaafir.

 
As for their beliefs about Allah, they believe that He fasts, prays, sleeps, wakes up, writes, makes mistakes and has intercourse — exalted be Allah far above all that they say.
From the above, even the most basic of Muslims would find these beliefs repugnant and unacceptable to Islam. Therefore, our scholars unanimously agreed that this group is misguided, and not part of Islam at all because its beliefs are completely contradictory to Islam.

 
In April 1974, a major conference was held by the Muslim World League in Makkah, which was attended by representatives of Muslim Organisations from around the world. This conference announced that this sect is Kaafir and beyond the pale of Islam, and told Muslims to resist its dangers and not to corporate with the Qadianis/Ahmadis or bury their dead in Muslim graveyards.

 
The Islamic Fiqh council of Capetown, South Africa also issued the following statement:
Firstly, the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be a prophet or a messenger and to receive revelation are clearly a rejection of proven and essential elements of Islam, which unequivocally states that Prophet hood ended with Muhammad (PBUH) and that no revelation will come to anyone after him. Thus, this claim by Ghulam Ahmad makes him and anyone who agrees with him an apostate who is beyond the fold of Islam.

 
In conclusion, I challenge any Ahmadi who refutes these things to a debate because these are found in their own books, writings and publications of their founder. The Talinding cemetery altercation can be avoided in future if these Ahmadis improvise their own grave yards just like they do for their mosque. How can you claim to be a Muslim when you don’t pray behind us yet ironically you want to share graveyards with us? Nobody is asking Ahmadis to leave but let them keep their religion and let us keep ours. By the way Imam Fatty’s stance on this issue is the position of all our mainstream Islam scholars and we should desist from labeling him as an element that is fanning religious intolerance in the Gambia.

BB SANNEH

WHY BARROW’S SUDDEN VISIT TO THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA

 

I am not critical of Adama Barrow as a person, because from my observation I gave him a lot of credit based on his person, he is calm, easy-going, and above all humble, With this qualities together with other traits I believe he is an introvert and from my perspective he is frangible (weak) person.

 
Is just over a couple of weeks since a confrontation happened between the Ahmadiyya muslims and non-Ahmadi muslims in the Gambia, this lead Mr. Abdoulie fatty of bakoteh to speak and preach hate amongst our beloved Gambian people and a few days later Religious Elders visited the president which is very much welcome by many folks, and Friday 19th May 2017 the president’s visit to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia is quickly scheduled. I have no objections on his visit to Saudi provided it is based on genuine reasons and for the betterment of the republic of the Gambia and its people. On his visit Mr Barrow must be briefed about saudi’s foreign policy and their willingness to spread their ideologies by any means necessary. They have tried it in many countries and those that fell in to their trap are still in trouble and will continue to be in trouble unless they change their minds.

 
The idea of WAHABISM is Saudi’s principal interest in Muslim nations especially in poorer nations, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh are examples of countries they try to use to oppress and suppress other faiths and even other Islamic minority sects. They were behind the 1970s meeting of the world Islamic nations where they make a FATWA ( declaration) that Ahmadis are non-muslims and that is over 3 decades now and are still funding groups and even states who will try to fight Ahmadis and other sects once their ideology differes from wahabish SIR DAWDA JAWARA WAS THERE BUT DIDN’T SIGN TO IT.

 
Barrow must know that the monarch of Saudi is not the custodian of the Islamic faith even in Saudi much more in the world because the monarch has had several confrontations with scholars in Saudi over the improper management of the affairs of the kingdom and how they want to control the minds of the masses in propagating their ideas about faith to be specific islam. And that even in the Gambia during jammeh’s era they have tried to use him through our so-called scholars, he adheres to their demand but the execution of the deal was the problem, he was a little bit reluctant considering his interest on the other hand he needed the money from Saudi, but let me make it very clear fighting Ahmadiyyat spreads it more to people that don’t even know about the jamat.

 
It could be worry some but perhaps the truth, the kingdom of Saudi promotes intolerance and extremist wahabi creed domestically and internationally, they have been lavishing over $100BILLON in the past 3 decades in exporting fanatical ideas across the globe especially in poor Muslim countries. Because of the intolerance and the extremist idea, in July last year the US government called on Saudi to respect the right of private worship or faces sanctions as they were violating the obligation under the human right convention on right to worship. PEOPLE MUST DIFFERENTIATE ISLAM FROM THE MONARCH OF SAUDI, the monarch is the world’s leading sponsors of Islamic extremism.

 
Therefore, I highly welcome Barrows visit to Saudi but he must be careful of the things they will like to install in his fragile and delicate mind, the people of the Gambia are tired and can no more take any form of intimidation or oppression take note of that and if you took the extremist ideology you will be doomed like others before you who stand in the ways of the righteous, may Allah forbid.I love you like I love every other Gambia but Gambia come first.

Lamin Darboe

GUNJUR-CHINESE SYSTEMATICALY ENDANGERING OUR SEA, BEACH AND ENVIRONMENT

 

The odour is unmistakable, the stench is unavoidable, fish price skyrocket, frustrations abound, Bro you don’t know the extent to which our patience has been exercised said Mr Bojang.

 
I intimated, Bro, stench and odour is the same and Mr Bojang sighed with a deep breath to collect himself. Imagine someone come to your compound, dump sewage, put herbicide on your lawn and throw some cyanide into your well, how will you feel. I said definitely that will trigger war. He went on, what is more frustrating is; the Chinese have the audacity to threaten us, and frustrating still, they are exploiting our own brethren to perpetrate their odious crime against our environment and fish resources for only fifty cents. These our brethren have no conscience and only care about their pockets at the detriment of our community and environment. I said hmmm this is ugly business and definitely it’s time to show the Chinese who the boss is.

 
Mr Bojang went on, Mr Darboe can you imagine a Gambian doing this sort of stuff in China or India. Chinese and Indians who kill black folks just for dating their girls. We put the government in power to protect our livelihood, our environment and resources but the former government colluded with some notable Gunjurians to establish this Chinese factory on our pristine beach which is our heritage and great source of tourist attraction; is being systematically destroyed by Chinese with excuse of providing local employment. The former Yaya government has no respect for the will of the people and certainly no respect for the environment or our local beaches. Yaya plus local henchmen have been a continuing sources of despair for Gunjur, first he usurped it’s Kenyekenye Jameng area, fence it with high walls and allowed this notorious Chinese company to rape our fish resources, pollute the beaches and gas us with this foul stench which we don’t actually know what type of gas it is.

 
Fare enough I have heard it all. This issue cannot be brush aside any more, it has to be brought the attention of the new administration to take urgent action.
The fracas about the Chinese company started barely some two years ago and the fish factory as was superficiality named was initially slated as manufacturing plant for fertilizer production but unknowing to the generality of Gunjur citizenry, was a plant for manufacturing fish products in form of pellets for Chinese market. It’s products still shrouded in secrecy is sent to China in packages and even the local workforce don’t actually know the complete production process. There are certain stages according some staffs which only the Chinese know. Also there are certain areas of the plant which is restricted, a no go area for the local Gunjur staffs according sources familiar with the workings of the plant.

 
The whole process was established without proper consultation with local stakeholders and if local grapevine is to be trusted, it’s only the chief, the alkali and some village authorities who were in the know of the full extent of this notorious Chinese enterprise. The name of some local big fish, a prominent businessman surfaced as the mastermind of the plant. According to sources the plant was purportedly setup for fertilizer manufacture but a month into the process people noticed dumping of unwanted fish on the beaches, on road sides and places proximal to dwellings.

 
Chinese normally build local infrastructure when they set up plants like this to attract local empathy and support; they build roads and sometimes hospitals. However in this case they ignored our people’s aspirations and invited no input from them since they knew that they have Yaya government’s backing as well some local power brokers in their pocket. Power brokers who can easily sell their land and sea resources for a dime.

 
The road to the beach plied by their heavy lorries and vans is in disrepair and cannot cater for such a high volume of traffic. It is a feeder road made of gravel which Yaya ignored even though he has been frequenting the place to visit kenyekenye Jameng.

 
Simply because Gunjurians have inconsequential political clout in his calculations or out of pure disdain. For years our people have been silent bystanders out of fear of their lives, hopelessly acquiesced. Just as in many part of Gambia, Jammeh’s pervasive dominance of the political, economic and social life of the Gambians citizenry has haply been challenged. He succeeded systematically in dividing the people and inserting his loyal enablers in form of local power brokers and NIA to intimidate and coalesced people to submission.

 
Gunjur was no exception and this has led to the current imbroglio which has so far prove perilous to not only to the environment and sea resources but to the standard of living of our people. As Tuklor Sey eloquently put it, Gunjur’s environmental ruination by the Chinese is a national challenge because that sea once was a honey comb for many Gambians. The Gunjur catfish with its distinctive taste and Gunjur smoked fish used to be an excellent source of protein for many towns villages from Kombo to Basse. Since Yaya government came in, Gunjur’s pre-eminence in fish production dwindled to near extinction and Tangi took over.

 
Gunjur is a prolific settlement to a diversity of tribes and people from Gambians regions; it’s widely acclaimed reputation as the most welcoming town to people from many areas in the Gambia as well as the sub-region. It’s is one of the few prominent Mandinka dominated towns where people will give their daughter in marriage to foreigners without much attention to the backgrounds of the spouse in contradistinction to many other towns in the Gambia. In many towns, especially in Badibu, they want to know your background first, especially, to authenticate whether you are of a Karanke, or Jali background before they decide to offer you spouse. In some places even grave yards exhibits people status in life, a distinction of Fooro and Jongo, not in Gunjur the town of scholars of distinction and pre-eminence, in the person of Bun Jeng and Hatab Bojang; not to forget Kombo Sillah the king and emir of Kombo.
Not to be distracted from the burning issue at hand, the people of Gunjur deserve more. It provided the sand mining which generated huge cash flows for the country for decades yet the local infrastructure benefited nothing from those resources and it has been documented that Yaya Jammeh solely monopolized those cash flows at the detriment of our environment. Just as KARTONG beach was close to decimation, so was Gunjur yet the denizens sheepishly acquiesce out of fear of persecution by Jammeh henchmen.

 
The Chinses fishing methods fall below international standards and is very destructive to fish resources. They will soon deplete our fish resources because the type of net they use does not discriminate between the fish species they need and the type they don’t need. That’s why they dispose the unwanted fish to the dismay of the local populations who find it expensive to buy local Chalo.
The local fishermen cannot compete with a well resourced and technologically advance fishing equipment that the Chinese deploy and therefore the local industry is slowly shrinking with consequential loss of revenue and standard of living.

 
Our environment is a sacred heritage which we shall protect with blood and sweat come what may and the current government’s sluggish and apparently insignificant efforts despised our contributions in enthroning their candidate who happen to be the majority leader in parliament. Perhaps now the issue has been thrust to the fore-front of national discourse some urgent action will be taken to address the situation. It has been grapevine news that the environment minister who is purportedly out of town will visit the location once he returns.

 
The Chinese must either have to put their act together, stop this senseless rape of our environment and sea resources or they totally close down. If the government failed to prevail on them which we hope not, we will not hesitate to unleash local activism which may germinate some unintended consequences.
The saddest and most disappointing aspect that bedevil this episode is the collusion of our own brethren out of sheer opportunism and ignorance. Th Chinese may be gone but Gunjur stays and recriminations may make it difficult to look at folks in the eye. SALAM

L Darboe Leicester

Gambia: Using Guarantees of Non-Recurrence to Prevent Past Atrocities

 

Daniel Bekele

Senior Director for Africa Advocacy, HRW

 

The following is the transcript of a speech given by Daniel Bekele, Human Rights Watch senior director for Africa advocacy, at the Gambia National Stakeholders Conference on Justice and Human Rights, May 23-25, 2017.

Introduction

Thank you to the Gambian government and Justice Minister Tambadou for inviting Human Rights Watch to contribute to this important conversation.

Over the last 20 years, I have made many visits to Gambia. I was last in Banjul in October 2016 at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, where Human Rights Watch participated in a panel to discuss threats to freedom of speech ahead of December’s presidential election.

It’s a real pleasure to be here today to see how Gambia has changed since then, and to have the chance to discuss with you how to ensure that Gambia capitalizes on its hard-won freedoms.

When I was asked to speak on this topic, I was reminded of a tweet from a Gambian journalist the day after former president Jammeh had left for exile: The sun is smiling on #Gambia. Not because #Jammeh has gone. Or, #Barrow is coming. But because #GambiaHasDecided that #NeverAgain.

This tweet captures exactly what is meant when we discuss guarantees of non-recurrence – thinking through the reforms necessary to ensure that, whomever governs Gambia, be it today, in 5 years, or 50 years, the human rights violations of the Jammeh era are not repeated.

I want to focus my remarks today on four key areas pivotal to ensuring lasting respect for the rule of law and human rights: ensuring the neutrality of the security sector; ending impunity; strengthening the independence of the judiciary; and reforming the legal framework.

1. Ensuring the neutrality of the security sector

Ensuring the police, intelligence services and the armed forces can carry out their mandate in a neutral and professional manner should be a key priority for the new government. Jammeh’s government used Gambian security institutions to arrest, intimidate and coerce his real or perceived opponents, turning the police, intelligence services and elements of the army into instruments for his own political and even personal goals.

Gambia’s new government, although it has only been in office for a short time, has begun the process of transforming the police and security services into institutions that Gambians trust to protect and respect them. The new government has released dozens of political prisoners, and ended the powers of arrest and detention of the feared National Intelligence Agency, now known as the State Intelligence Services.

The government, with support from its international partners, should now implement a longer-term security sector reform program, including by passing legislation setting out in detail the role of the police and intelligence services in domestic law enforcement. The government should also establish a mechanism for vetting the security forces to investigate and sanction individuals most responsible for grave human rights violations in the past.

The government should also establish independent civilian institutions capable of providing effective oversight of government institutions. We commend the Ministry of Justice for its commitment to the creation of a national human rights institution, and urge it to be given the financial and functional independence it needs to be effective, in line with the Principles relating to the Status of National Human Rights Institutions (known as The Paris Principles). The Gambian National Assembly also has an essential role to play in holding the executive to account, and its members would benefit from training on international human rights standards relating to law enforcement.

2. An end to impunity

During our research into Jammeh-era abuses, we could find no example of members of the police, intelligence services or military who were convicted or held to account for torture, killings or other serious violations. The government’s failure to investigate and prosecute abuses enabled future violations.

This March, we wrote to Justice Minister Aboubacarr Tambadou to welcome the important steps the Gambian government had taken to end this state of impunity including reversing Gambia’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court and committing to investigate the fate of individuals who were forcibly disappeared during the Jammeh era. We also commended President Barrow and his government’s stated intent to establish a truth, reconciliation and reparations commission to investigate crimes committed during Jammeh’s rule. A truth commission offers the potential for families to learn the fate of their loved ones, as well as the opportunity to begin a national dialogue on reforms to assure that Jammeh-era abuses are never repeated.

The announcement of a truth commission should be part of a wider effort to hold accountable those most responsible for human rights violations during Jammeh’s rule. While criminal prosecutions of past human rights violations can present challenges, especially to a newer administration facing many competing demands, we have seen the benefits of ensuring such cases do not fall off the agenda. Victims need to have the opportunity for redress for the crimes they have suffered. In addition, fair trials in accordance with international standards build respect for the rule of law. They send a clear message that serious crimes will not be tolerated, while also signaling that justice – not vengeance – will prevail.

As the Gambian government sets out the function and structure of a truth commission in the coming weeks and months, it should consider how the commission will work alongside and complement judicial prosecutions. It is also crucial to consider how judicial institutions and a truth and reconciliation commission might share information while protecting the rights of victims and witnesses as well as respecting the rights of the alleged perpetrators.

3. Strengthening and ensuring the impartiality of the judiciary

Ending the impunity of the Jammeh era will also require efforts to strengthen the Gambian justice system, which faces significant challenges as it struggles to overcome more than two decades of neglect and misuse. Human Rights Watch documented widespread executive interference in the judiciary when Jammeh was president, including executive pressure on foreign judges on temporary assignment in Gambia. The new Gambian chief justice should work with the Ministry of Justice to devise a system for the training and appointment of judges that protects them from executive interference, both in law and practice. Thought should also be given to the creation of independent complaints commissions to provide oversight of the police and office of the prosecutor.

Gambia should also consider the reforms needed to develop the investigative, prosecutorial and adjudication techniques and capacities necessary to prosecute torture, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions. Gambia now has the unique opportunity to build such a capacity including by inviting international experts to work alongside Gambian investigators and prosecutors. Gambia also currently lacks any formal program for victim or witness protection, and should devise mechanisms, ideally through the passage of legislation, to protect victims and witnesses involved in sensitive cases.

4. Reforming the legal framework to better protect human rights

Gambians fought hard for the right to freedom of expression including expressing criticism and opposition to the government. It is vital that Gambia now revises its legal framework to reflect these values. Jammeh’s government used a series of draconian and overly broad laws to suppress activists and opponents and target vulnerable groups he sought to demonize. An arrest pursuant to one of Gambia’s old repressive laws was often a gateway to far more serious human rights violations, including prolonged incommunicado detention and torture.

I want to add Human Rights Watch’s voice to calls to immediately repeal or substantially amend the laws that Jammeh’s government used to suppress freedom of speech and assembly, including on sedition, criminal libel, “spreading false information,” giving false information to a public servant and on the censorship of online expression. The government should also amend the Public Order Act requirement of permits for public assemblies, so as to require only notification to the authorities of planned public assemblies.

Gambia should also adopt a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of religion, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity. Any laws that run contrary to these values should be repealed or amended.

Conclusion

I have covered a lot of ground, and made perhaps too many recommendations to the Gambian government, which has after all only been in office for a few months.

But if we and other human rights groups are demanding a lot of our interlocutors in the Gambian government, it is because we sense both a true opportunity and the political will to build a truly rights-respecting and democratic Gambia.

Many of the members of President Barrow’s government, like much of Gambian civil society, have a proud and courageous history of human rights activism, while Gambia itself is the home of the African Union’s flagship human rights institution.

At a time when the human rights movement is looking for flickers of light in an ever-darkening world, Gambia truly has the chance to cement its status as the human rights capital of Africa and to develop the legal and institutional guarantees to ensure that Gambia truly can say, “Never Again.”

Talking Human Rights in the New Gambia

 

By Daniel Bekele

Senior Director for Africa Advocacy

 

Truth Commission Should Complement Justice for Jammeh-era Crimes

 

“This is the new Gambia,” Jobe, a Gambian taxi driver told me, as I arrived in the country for the first time since the inauguration of President Adama Barrow. Three months after erstwhile strongman Yahya Jammeh left Gambian soil, the capital, Banjul, is buzzing and Gambia, known as the “smiling coast of Africa,” is still celebrating the end of more than two decades of dictatorial rule.

I have traveled regularly to Banjul over the past 20 years to attend the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, whose presence in Gambia belied the arbitrary arrests, torture, and enforced disappearances committed by the government during the Jammeh era.

Since Jammeh’s defeat in the December 2016 presidential elections, Gambia has promised to become the “human rights capital of Africa.” Barrow’s government has emptied jails of political prisoners, renewed its commitment to the International Criminal Court, and overseen legislative elections deemed free and fair by international observers.

This week, Gambians and friends of Gambia from many walks of life gathered for a conference to consider how to build on this early promise, and create the laws, institutions, and values necessary to protect human rights and secure the rule of law for the country.

A key question posed at the gathering was how to address the terrible crimes of the past to ensure a better future. The government has announced plans to create a truth, reconciliation, and reparations commission, to begin later this year, that would help families learn the fate of their loved ones and provide closure to victims.

And while the government has also promised thorough investigations into Jammeh-era abuses, there is concern that setting up a truth commission might cause criminal investigations to be delayed, or even forgotten. Yassin Senghore, a Gambian lawyer and human rights activist, told me, “Gambian victims know that Jammeh-era judges and courts failed to protect them. They don’t want to be cast aside by the justice system a second time.”

When I addressed the conference, I said that while truth commissions can be meaningful, they should always be part of a wider, complementary effort to bring human rights violators to justice. At a time when the global human rights movement is looking for flickers of light in an ever-darkening world, Gambia has the chance to show that, as the home of Africa’s flagship human rights institution, the values of justice and human rights still burn bright.

GOOD MORNING PRESIDENT BARROW

 

What is really going on in beautiful Gambia? Why are we so laid back, Mr President? Everything little thing which oozes no immediate physical harm is rubbished as insignificant without any thorough examination. Mr President, your biggest diminish prospect is security. Every other day, in new Gambia, we witness instances where security of our country is severely tested by a bunch of irresponsible citizens. We have seen it happened in Bakau when a group of drug peddlers stood up and obstructed law enforcement officers from executing their duties. The same was mirrored at Tanji beach where security officers had to contain youths armed with cutlasses, matchets, stones and sticks. Similar episode also was manifested in Kanilai by a group of women threatening to bare their essential just to stop security officers carry out their duty. No government can compromise security and survive Mr President.

 
A video is currently circulating on Gambian social media of a fella threatening to open the gates of hell is any security officer dares step in Kanilai to execute a court order on Goloh’s frozen assets. Worryingly, many take his threat with a teensy weensy pinch of salt. And case closed. Seriously? It is about time even if his “bravado does not amount to a hell of beans” for government to quickly response to such threats and make the public aware that no threat on the person, life or property of anyone in the Gambia will be rubbished as childish banter. Jammeh with all his anything anything did warn you, Mr President, not to compromise security of the country. We may downplay the looming threats showing their ugly heads in our midst but the country is being tested for ungovernability. Something must be done about it if any development is to take place. How can you govern in the heart of insecurity and instability? It is these little threats that we hastily bin as rubbish which mutate into the Farato rioters’ rampage. I am concerned because I can foresee the far reaching and costly security ripples this is leading to.

 
It really beats any reasonable imagination how we as citizen architect our abysmal doom. The minster of Fisheries and water resources rested the coastal line of Gunjur disaster on the heads of few poor fishermen. How convenient Mr President? Even a minute old baby knows the Hon Minister was nothing but a glue-huffing imbecile covering up for corporate exploitation of our environment. His reasoning that Golden Leaf Factory had to go though vigorous vetting before issuing its operational licence is likened to averting a rainfall with one’s palm. They may have complied with all government protocols but is that a guarantee that they will uphold those protocols after a year or so operation? Everything from the galaxy of washed out dead fish to the illegal dumping of chemical and fish waste all accentuate their breach of those very protocols. Acts and atti6from ordinary citizenry and government officials are the marinating ingredients for insecurity, dissent and rampage.

 
No one is insinuating you issue threats like Goloh to get things done. One thing about him though, he is known for carrying out his threats perhaps that explains why what obtains in Gambia now was only imaginable in our forlorn dreams. The laws are there, Mr President. All you need is to implement them. Inciting and threatening violence is a felon. Corruption is equally a felon. You want to be taken seriously? Be serious Mr President.

 
Karamba Touray has this to add, “Impeding or even attempting to impede legitimate law enforcement even of the slightest kind is intolerable. It must be swiftly dealt with . I believe the police have been entirely too soft on the enforcement side in this new democracy in their quest to shed the excesses of the tyranny that subverted them as an institution and the laws they are sworn to serve. That may be having the unintended consequences of emboldening miscreants to challenge law and order itself. It has stop. Fidelity to the law which lies at the heart of a democracy is contingent on full and uniform enforcement by those charged with the responsibility. People who stand in the way of legitimate police work must be severely punished whatever their purported grievances”.

Sulayman Jeng
Birmingham, UK

Founder Of GambiaHasDecided Explains The Role Of Civil Society In Building The New Gambia

 

 

Mr. Salieu Taal, one of the founders of The Gambia Has Decided movement has highlighted the role of civil society organizations in building a better Gambia. Mr Taal was speaking at the national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights at Kairaba Beach Hotel.

“We must create a new Gambian who is educated, enlightened and informed to build a better Gambia for all,” Salieu Taal stated.

Mr. Taal explained that the role of civil society is advocacy for justice, human rights and good governance, saying it is a barometer of telling the government what the people really want. He talked about the need for institutional reforms, respect for human rights and democracy to value the change that happened in the country. He also talked about the need for communication between the government and the civil society because they are not enemies.

“The civil society makes the government to govern better in the best interest of the country,” he pointed out.

The co-founder of the GambiaHasDecided made a brief explanation of how the movement was formed. He said the movement was non partisan which was initially formed to amplify the voice of the Gambian people when they went to the December 1 presidential polls to removed dictatorship. He said the first hashtag “Jammeh Must Go” came up after the former president rejected the results and later it was changed to “GambiaHasDecided”.

Mr. Taal explained that the idea of forming a movement came after the former dictator rejected the results causing confusion in the country. He said there was ranting on the social media against the actions of the former dictator which they felt was not enough so they decided to come up with the movement. He said they first started to change their profiles on the social media, print t-shirts and later printed billboards.

Mr. Gaye Sowe, Executive Director of IHRDA has elaborated on the need for institutional building and strengthening as a key to a functional democracy. He talked about the prison laws which he said are redundant and outdated because many of the rules were colonial laws. He made recommendations to change them to international best practices.

Director Sowe highlighted the independence and challenges of the national centre for civic education particularly problems of staff training and funds to execute its functions of civic awareness on the media. He talked about the inadequate governing structures of the country’s police force relating to political interference, low salaries and human rights training among other things. He also talked about the lack of resources and executive interference of the Ombudsman.

Director Sowe further highlighted the need to amend the section that empowers members of the National Intelligence Agency now State Intelligence Agency to arrest and detain anyone without any warrant. He also made recommendations to increase salaries to retain Gambian lawyers in the justice department. He called on the executive to stop meddling in the justice department.

Meanwhile, Ms. Sabrina Mahtani of the Amnesty International added her voice to encouraged dialogue between the government and the civil society.

“I think The Gambia should be the human rights capital of West Africa,” Sabrina Mahtani said.

Ms. Mahtani expressed hope in the new government to create better environment for human rights defenders in the Gambia.

“Cases Of Remand Prisoners Should Be Treated With Urgency” Deputy Speaker Tells Authorities

0

 

By Lamin Sanyang

 

Honourable Momodou LK Sanneh, Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly has called on the office of the Inspector General of Police and The Ministry of Justice to urgently look into the continuous detention of prisoners who are locked up for decades without trial at the remand wing of the State Central Prison in Banjul.

Honourable Sanneh raised these concerns at the national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights at Kairaba Beach Hotel.

“I am appealing to the Inspector General of Police and Ministry of Justice to urgently look into the cases of those detained at remand for 10–15 years without being taken to court,” Deputy Speaker Momodou LK Sanneh asserted.

He further pointed out: “We have to act quickly to solve these problems now that we are living in a new Gambia.”

Deputy Speaker Sanneh who was incarcerated along with the executives of the United Democratic Party by the former dictator said there are many people languishing in the remand wing for more than a decade without being charged. He added that over twenty people are locked up in small cell of 4 by 4 metros.

“These cells are unventilated,” he lamented.

Lawyer Janet Sallah Njie, former President of the Female Lawyers Association Gambia FLAG also emphasised on some of the issues raised by the deputy speaker. She argued that focus should not be place only on the past but the present is equally important. She said some of the prison conditions under the past regime still exist in the present administration.

Lawyer Sallah Njie explained her recent visit to the Janjangbureh Prisons at the provincial part of the country. She called on the need to improve the conditions of the prisons. She further called for institutional reforms of the judiciary and professional conducts of magistrates in the dispensation of free trial.

Meanwhile, several issues of transitional justice as a mechanism to overcome past human rights violations, prosecution as a form of transitional justice mechanism and forms of reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence were among the topics discussed at the national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights.

Managing The Frustration….

 

There is no doubt that there is a lot of anger and frustration among the youth of this country. What with the long reign of terror unleashed on the people of the country by a brutal government that was supposed to protect and serve them! Then there is the issue of the lack of adequate employment opportunities and the seeming injustices perpetrated on our people.

 

There is a widely held perception that the justice system in the previous government was compromised and is thought to have been corrupt. One potential problem and threat to peace and security is the issue of land ownership. It is believed that the former president interfered with the ownership of lands in many parts of the country. As such, judgements that have to do with land, and emanated from the justice system of the previous government are likely to be controversial and contentious.

 

Many there are who paid huge amounts of money for lands which they genuinely believed belonged to the people who sold it to them. So, they bought these lands, had their papers drawn and started construction on said lands. If therefore it is found out later that the land did not in fact belong to the sellers in the first place, one can imagine their anger and frustration. Add to that the fact that these people believe that the courts are compromised.

The fracas that occurred in Farato and Bafulotoo yesterday was therefore a boil over of pent up anger which had been suppresseed for a long time coming.

 

In my humble opinion, this matter should be thoroughly looked into by the Barrow Government and then amicable solutions sought. Whatever the case, dialogue should be a key element in trying to solve the problem. If need be, those people who had spent money to buy, construct, and move into those houses should be compensated. They should be given lands and an amount of money to construct houses similar to the ones that were demolished if their claims are established by a competent authority.

 

I think it is necessary for the government to revisit the court cases presided over by all those judges who are deemed to have been in Jammeh’s pockets. Justice should then be restored and those who were wrongly denied of the lands, and/or monies should be compensated. Let us use dialogue to solve our problems.

 

Having said all that, I should also say that it is wrong to take the law into one’s hands and wreak havoc on property – be it public or personal property. Whatever the case, we should never revert to violent protests. If we do, we will simply be destroying our country for no good reason. Everyone is allowed to demonstrate peacefully; but this must never be abused. Let us always remember that we are one country, one family, and one nation!

 

Let us love our country!

 

Tha Scribbler Bah

A Concerned Citizen

Jammeh should never be forgiven, says Sarjo Barrow

 

Veteran broadcaster Sarjo Barrow has that former President Jammeh should never be forgiven for he had committed a lot of atrocities during his 22-year reign as president of The Gambia.

“He should be prosecuted at the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague like they did to Charles Taylor [of Liberia] and Lauren Gbagbo [Ivory Coast],” Mr Barrow said in an interview with The Point newspaper recently.

Barrow, Gambia’s renowned Mandinka language broadcaster, accused the former president of destroying The Gambia.

The veteran journalist accused the former President Jammeh of inciting and promoting hatred, and demonising and bringing division among Gambians.

“He tribalised the army and other security outfits,” said journalist Barrow who shared the same surname with the President Adama Barrow even though there is no known blood relation between.

“Even the civil service was tribalised,” he added.

Not a member of UDP

Asked why he never spoke out against Jammeh during his presidency, Mr Barrow said “I was very angry and terrorised that I decided to keep quiet”.

“I never like Jammeh or ever voted for him since the formation of his political party and even my colleagues at GRTS [the state broadcaster] can attest to that,” he said. “I always avoided attending his immature programmes.”

The Brusibi-based journalist also rubbished rumours that he is a member of the United Democratic Party (UDP) saying: “I have never been a member of any political party since former President Jawara’s era.”

Barrow said no one can find his name in any political party’s record.

“I want to remain an independent journalist,” he asserted.

Mr Barrow started his broadcast career in May 1979 as a temporary announcer at Radio Gambia and rose through the ranks to become manager of radio programmes.

Source: Point Newspaper

UDP is not tribalistic

0

 

The deputy party leader of the United Democratic Party (UDP) Aji Yam Secka has refuted criticisms that the UDP is a tribal party.

Speaking at a recent meeting in Brikama, Madame Secka said the (UDP) party is established to serve the interest of all Gambians irrespective of tribe. “Let me state clearly that, the UDP was not formed by only Mandinkas but individuals from different tribes and religions,” Aji Yam Secka, herself Wollof speaking said. She added that the executive of the UDP has since emphasized that the party is and must never be a tribe-based party but one that belongs to all Gambians. “I believe that all Gambians should work together for the betterment of the country regardless of background,” she said. The UDP deputy leader further stressed that no tribe in the country irrespective of size or number can stand by its own.

The UDP Diaspora chairperson, Alkali Conteh said politics is all about building connections and friendships with people and organizations and serving one’s people to better lives and living conditions. “All genuine politicians must first have the country’s interest than tribal considerations,” Conteh said.

Source: Standard Newspaper

Time Has Come to Ban the APRC!

 

By Madi Jobarteh

 

After 22 years of misrule, the evidence of the carnage and plunder of Yaya Jammeh and APRC exposes itself every day, which shall continue till eternity because their victims and effects of their atrocities shall continue to exist forever. The sole beneficiary of the atrocities and plunder of public wealth has been none other than Yaya Jammeh himself and is party. When Yaya Jammeh steals public money it benefits himself and his party to stay longer in power. When Yaya Jammeh ordered the killing of opponents, it serves him and APRC to stay in power. Thus APRC is a direct beneficiary of the misrule, plunder and atrocities of Yaya Jammeh.

 
We now know that a large number of our citizens lost their lives in mysterious circumstances during the APRC reign. The recent indictments of tens of soldiers for murder clearly indicates that indeed Yaya Jammeh and the APRC had presided over the most brutal destruction of uncountable number of Gambian lives through strangulation, suffocation, beheading, shooting and hacking. They then went further to conceal dead bodies in bushes and forests, thrown into wells and crocodile ponds among other ungodly places in and around Kanilai, Foni and Kombo. The exhumation of dead bodies attests to the grisly conduct of this undesirable regime. Yet the APRC, which formed the government, failed to ensure justice and protection of the rights of Gambians. As a party, they enjoyed their dominance on the misery and disempowerment of Gambians.

 
From 11 November 1994 when AFPRC began its reign of bloodshed by summarily executing tens of our soldiers, we saw how this criminal military junta metamorphosed into the APRC as a political party to continue the same bloodshed. The most tragic part of that history is when you have Gambian civilians embrace this party to provide it the necessary power base and legitimacy to perpetuate murder and pillage in our country. Hence from 1997, the leading violator of the Gambia had been the APRC. With their control over the legislature and local government structures, this party had provided the perfect cover and support for Yaya Jammeh to destroy the Gambia. APRC failed to not only stand up for the Gambia, but went further to legitimize ad legalize the misconduct and violations of Yaya Jammeh with much fuel and fire. The legacy of APRC therefore is maiming and murder of Gambian lives and the plunder of public wealth.

 
This evidence can be traced to the several concocted coups from 1997 to 2000 during which Yaya Jammeh eliminated perceived and real opponents only to see the APRC as a party and lawmakers rally around this despot to validate his atrocities. The most tragic event came in the Year 2000 when on April 10 and 11, he ordered Gambian soldiers to open fire on innocent and defenseless schoolchildren. The response of the APRC lawmakers was to merely pass an indemnity act to protect the killers. Even when a commission of enquiry was conducted which had identified the perpetrators yet the APRC decided to ignore and forget.

 
Since April 2000, series of atrocities continued in this country such as on 16 December 2004 when a veteran journalist Deyda Hydara was shot dead. This was followed by the summary execution of Daba Marenah and four other soldiers on 4 April 2006. On 23 August 2012 the regime illegally executed nine prisoners in Mile 2 Prisons without following the rule of law. On 30 December 2014, Gambian Freedom Fighters were captured alive and summarily butchered to death. On 14 April 2016 scores of peaceful protestors led by Solo Sandeng were violently arrested and subjected to the most severe torture and rape leading to the immediate killing of Sandeng. Since then many more protestors have succumbed to the severe tortures such as Solo Koroma, Lang Marong and Ebrima Ceesay.

 
Today, thanks to the Barrow Administration Gambians also know the source of Yaya Jammeh’s ‘Allah’s Bank’. After all the open secret is that this ungodly son of the land has in his name 131 landed properties, 86 bank accounts and 14 companies. He had also directly taken out of SSHFC the amount of D189 million as well as 50 million US dollars from the International Gateway Project Account. Under the watch of the ruling APRC, Yaya Jammeh had opened special accounts while he continued to use public enterprises such as Gamtel, Gambia Ports Authority as well as NAWEC to bleed the country of its hard earned money. As if this was not enough, Yaya Jammeh went further to directly interfere with business entities to the point of causing the country to lose millions of dalasi in lawsuits. The cases of Alimenta, Carnegie Minerals and CONAPRO are all clear examples of abuse and impunity for which the Gambian people were forced to pay bitterly for the mess of one citizen! Yet APRC key mute but benefiting!
The fact that Yaya Jammeh as a single person can acquire so much properties, bank accounts and companies in the Gambia alone and not to mention his overseas concerns clearly shows that APRC was indeed a serious liability for Gambians. Therefore until now I had held the view that the APRC party should not be banned in the Gambia but today I wish to change my position to demand that APRC be banned in the Gambia from henceforth. This is because the APRC had been the container in which Yaya Jammeh delivered his venom on Gambians. APRC as a party gave Yaya Jammeh a cover and a conveyor to kill and defraud the Gambia and Gambians.

 
APRC cannot be separated from Yaya Jammeh and his atrocities because APRC is the political powerbase of the Government of Yaya Jammeh. In a democracy, presidents or prime ministers are elected on the basis of a party or as independents. In our case Yaya Jammeh was elected on the APRC ticket. It was APRC that formed the majority of the members of the National Assembly. Hence whatever Yaya Jammeh was able to do, it was directly possible because of his power base, the APRC. Hence if Yaya Jammeh is exiled, he certainly must go with APRC as his coat.

 
Until today, the Nazi party has not been officially banned in Germany. But Nazi symbols, flags, ideology, offices and materials have been completely closed, banned and criminalized. No one in Germany can promote in any way anything associated with the Nazi party. Thus effectively the party is banned even if by law there was no specific court order banning the party. Germany banned all elements of the party because of the intolerable atrocities, plunder and destruction that Hitler and his band of criminals caused Germany.

 
The APRC does not certainly match the scale of atrocity of the Nazi party, but in our history, the Gambia has never seen such carnage led by a political party. For that matter, the APRC deserves to be banned in the Gambia just like Yaya Jammeh. The APRC is a party of shame, destruction and murder. We had Yaya Jammeh because there was AFPRC and then APRC. We experienced atrocities because of APRC. We are defrauded because of APRC. The APRC as the dominant party in parliament failed as a legal and official entity tasked with a constitutional mandate to protect the supreme interests of the nation.

 
The APRC has a constitutional obligation to abide by the Constitution of the Gambia yet it chose to ignore and at the same time go against that Constitution. It chose to damage the sovereignty and national security of the Gambia. It chose to put the name and dignity of the Gambia into disrepute and ridicule worldwide. APRC like any other party or citizen has no choice or right to impose a religious state on the Gambia, or to disregard the rule of law or to aid and abet tyranny in the Gambia. Yet this was exactly what APRC decided to do wilfully in the Gambia. Why therefore should APRC survive! Any person who commits these crimes will face the law hence any group of people who constitute themselves into any entity, more so a political party will be liable for the same penalty if they commit the same crime.

 

Keeping the APRC in Gambian society means digging our wounds everyday as APRC represents the wounds of Gambians. Allowing APRC to continue to exist means we have exonerated it from its failures, complicity and direct participation in the abuse of human rights, disregard of the rule of law and killing of Gambians by the Yaya Jammeh Government. If we could credit the opposition parties for ousting Yaya Jammeh, then what can we claim to be the benefit and contribution of APRC. It is clear that APRC had one position and contribution, which was to maintain dictatorship because they benefitted from that dictatorship. Thus keeping APRC alive means we disrespect and dishonour the departed souls and those who were raped, beaten and tortured in every unimaginable way. The APRC has no value in the Gambia other than to further torment and traumatize victims and survivors of the atrocities of Yaya Jammeh. If there is a benefit provided by the presence of APRC, what is it?
Ban The APRC! NOW.

President Barrow Due In Banjul Today

 

President Adama Barrow and delegation have left Jeddah Royal Airport, Saudi Arabia this morning at 9am local time after a four day visit to the Kingdom. Barrow and delegation traveled to Riyadh on Friday, May 19 to attend The Arab Islamic American Summit on the invitation of Salman Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, king of Saudi Arabia, custodian of the two holy mosques and head of the house of Saud.

During his stay, President Barrow had the opportunity to perform Umra with members of his delegation before their departure from the holy land.

He also had the opportunity to meet with other African heads of state including Senegal’s Macky Sall, leaders of the Arab world and members of the Gambian community in Riyadh. President Barrow did not meet with US President, Donald Trump who was also in Riyadh for the summit. African leaders are said to have attended the summit as observers, they were not given any major role during the entire summit.

President Barrow was accompanied to the summit by Foreign Affairs Minister, Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, Interior Minister, Mai Ahmad Fatty, Tourism Minister, Ahmad Bah, the director of the state intelligence service (SIS), Ousman Sowe, Secretary General, Dawda Fadera, Permanent Secretary Foreign Affairs, Njogu Saer Bah and a few other government officials.

Barrow and delegation are expected to arrive at the Banjul International Airport at 5pm local time.

Compounds demolished in Bafuloto causes riots in Farato, Police clarifies

A number of compounds were on Tuesday demolished in Farato Medina otherwise call Bafuloto, causing bloody riots in the area.

The people of Farato embarked on the demolition exercise in Bafuloto through a court order.

The demolition team led by Momodou Secka from the Sheriff Division accompanied by a team of Police Intervention Unit PIU officers were drove away from Bafuloto with stones up to the Police station in Farato.

Their cars were burnt down, the grader hired by physical planning to demolish the compounds was burnt down and tires burnt on the highway blocking traffic in Farato.

Several people suffered injuries and rushed to the nearest hospital.

This land dispute according to residents has been in court since 2006.

Giving a clear picture of what caused the violence, Police Public Relations Officer Inspector Foday Conta said the tension is caused by a court order issued to some individuals to go and make demolitions in Farato Medina ( Bafuloto).

According to him, upon arrival and as they were on the demolition exercise, some people in Bafuloto village came out and stoned them.

“As the stoning was going on, they ran for their lives. There was security but it wasn’t that strong to resist and control the crowd. So, they all have to run for their lives. Through the help of the security, the demolition team ran to the Police station in Farato for safety” he explained.

PRO Conta said because Farato stations is a small station, when the demolition team arrived for their safety, the mobs from Bafuloto also followed them and the security there could not control them before the arrival of the reinforcement.

“For that matter, the Grader was burnt down with another Mercedes Benz 190 and road blocked” he said.

He confirmed that the Police has arrested many people and are currently detained at Brikama Police station helping them in their investigation. He wouldn’t give the specific number of arrests or names of those arrested for security reasons saying the case is at its preliminary stage. He said investigations will follow suit and from there whosoever is found wanting will face the full force of the law.

The police spokesperson advised the general public to desist from this attitude saying if anyone is dissatisfied with a court ruling or whatsoever, he or she has the right place to go for an appeal.

“So, going to the court means you can get justice but if you take the law into your own hands, it is very unfortunate. We will advise that in whatever they are doing, let them put the law into consideration” he advised.

He reminded the occupants of the disputed land that this is a court order issued for them to be evicted and if they feel offended, they should go to the court and raise their points but they cannot obstruct the people demolishing the place or obstructing the police performing their duties.

“If the court has ordered that they vacate, of course they will vacate and if they are dissatisfied they shoud take a proper procedure by going back to the courts” he concluded.

Analysing SEMLEX – The Gambia’s new-Passports Merchant

 

I refused to buy into the notion that a rogue Belgian entity widely discredited in international circles has entered into agreements with the government of the Gambia in printing her new passports and all such national identity documentations. Athough the rumour mill doing the rounds on social media has in fact come to be true, ordinary folks are at a loss as to why and on what terms such a deal hinges on. For the record, this ill-advised deal was crafted in the dying days of the Jammeh regime; not the current administration. And due to the sensitive nature of national security matters attached in holding large volumes of citizens data, I am extremely concerned that the country’s soul has been sold to a foreign agent. The Gambian people have every right to feel betrayed and to be outraged at the mechanics of this secret collusion which has clearly mortgaged our future to the unknown.

On June 16, 2016 SEMLEX rushed with the announcement that it has entered into agreement with the government of the Gambia to print her national ID card, driving licences, resident permit, car registration certificate, visa and border management systems. The company then pursued using the “Good-Gambia-image” for marketing purposes luring-in other unsuspecting African nations to sign up. Based on empirical records in how the company descend upon unstable African leaders bearing gifts, one can state with near-certainty that naked corruption was at play here. Although in a state of flux, the constitution reign supreme with clearly defined powers and role for everyone in nation building. It further gives Parliament a say and to ratify such agreements before being operational (section 79). This was not the case here given APRC stranglehold of the ‘LawHouse’ at the time. For decades, clueless African leaders continue to be caught up in controversy against the grain. In Gambia’s case, it will be an insult to the memory and legacy of those hard-fought men and women of the ”Struggle” who died for a cause; a noble cause indeed, that ‘never again’ shall tyranny & abuse of political office be tolerated in our dispensation. I therefore call on Parliament to exercise its oversight reach and to conduct investigations in earnest.

SEMLEX is causing havoc in every country it operates, and is facing charges of bribery and corruption at the European Court. This begs the question why did the Interior ministry not conduct research on the firm before entering into any such agreement plundering the nations wealth abroad. National security risk is at stake here which makes it the more dangerous. How can such a discredited and untrustworthy foreign entity be given monopoly over all facets of the country’s national identification. Can you imagine Britain or the US or perhaps even Senegal outsourcing its passport manufacture to a Gambian company? The practice further reeks of incompetence, and I fear foul-play in the long run preempting injury to the state.

Research has uncovered a troubling trail of Africa’s dictatorial regimes cozied up to this tainted firm. From D.R CONGO, MOZAMBIQUE, SOUTH SUDAN, Guinea Bissau to Jammeh’s Gambia – you shall not find any respectable democratic State hiring SEMLEX. How ironic, yet very strange indeed. The Gambian people have every right to be outraged and to question this linkage, and what the Barrow government is going to do about it. The government has the power to review the terms and conditions of the said contract and to nullify on grounds of illegality for not following the proper parliamentary checks and protocol. The procurement procedure was flawed too in terms of bidding which had marginalised domestic competitors. Folks on every account this deal is found wanting, begging for scrutiny. And precisely why the interior ministry and the presidency must come out explain itself – reassuring the wider citizenry in the process.

Gibril Saine, LONDON.

“I Call On The Barrow Administration To Appoint Vice President Without Delay”–Lawyer Hawa Sisay Sabally

 

By Lamin Sanyang

 

Senior Lawyer Hawa Sisay Sabally has called on the Barrow Administration to appoint a vice president without any further delay.

“I call on the Barrow Administration to appoint a Vice President without delay,” Lawyer Hawa Sisay Sabally said.

Lawyer Sisay Sabally made these statements as a panelist at the national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights at Kairaba Beach Hotel.

The senior lawyer in her observation on the challenges and opportunities of the 1997 Constitution has quoted section 77 subsection (3) to called on the new administration to appoint a vice president without delay though she said the constitution does not specify a time frame but the functions of the vice president cannot remain vacant for many months. She referred to instances where the constitution mandates the vice president to represent the president of the republic at the National Assembly. She warned the Barrow administration to move away from the bad practices of the past.

“I recommend for presidential candidates to have running mates or time frame for the appointment of the vice president to avoid what is happening now,” Lawyer Sisay Sabally pointed out.

The senior lawyer went further to make recommendations for two term limits in office for the president and the abolition of age limit. She also made recommendations for the presidential elections to be held on the eve of the expiration of the president’s term in office so that if defeated he or she will vacate his office and the state house within 48 hours. She called for the amendment of the section that stops those dismissed from work from contesting in presidential elections.

Lawyer Hawa Sisay Sabally recommended the appointment and dismissal of judges by the president to be abolished and handled the Judicial Service Commission.

“The 1997 Constitution gives too much powers to the president,” Lawyer Ida Drammeh stated.

She added:”No matter how good the president may be he or she should not be given too much powers. ”

Lawyer Drammeh quoted section 68 subsection (5) of the constitution that talks about the salary and business engagements of the president. She called for clarity on the matter to distinct the two. She further stated that the immunity of the president should seize immediately the person leaves office.

“The biggest challenges of the 1997 Constitution is when the military decrees passed by the former Armed Forces Provisional Ruling Council AFPRC were made part of our laws,” Lawyer Drammeh asserted.

She further pointed out:”Several sections of the economic crimes are not in consistent with the provisions yet this military decrees remained in our statue book.”

She buttressed the role of the security officers which she said should be highlighted in the next constitution to avoid what has happened in the past. She also said that the new constitution should capture the president’s oath of office and the one who should preside over it. She talked about the lack of clarity on the matter.

The Chief Justice in his closing statement revealed the intention of the state to draft a new constitution rather than taking a piecemeal approach because there are many amendments which could affect the current constitution.

“There is a strong case for the drafting of a new constitution under the leadership of a new group of experts set by the state,” Chief Justice Hassan B Jallow said.

Chief Justice Jallow highlighted that the newly drafted constitution will be subjected to a countrywide referendum.

Meanwhile, a Zambian Professor who was part of the panelist also recommended a legislative road map for The Gambia. He called for constitutional review, nationwide consultation, referendum and civic awareness among other things. He talked about the need to train judges on the constitution.

HELLO MR PRESIDENT….

 

The Chinese Company Saga…

I have already written about the damage the Chinese Company, Golden Lead Factory is doing in Gunjur and its surrounding towns and villages. But that, Mr President, was before I knew the extent of the damage. I now know that the damage is worse than I initially imagined.

 

Yesterday, a comrade of mine, who happens to be from the area and is involved in activism against environmental degradation sent me images of the river in that area and a report on the activities of this horrible company. To say that I was shocked would be an understatement. This is so terrible that I can say it is unspeakable.

 

The wildlife in that area is dying due to whatever poisonous chemicals these people have thrown into the water. Mr President, I can even say that no one is safe in this country now. The fish caught in those coastal towns are sold and consumed in all markets in the urban area and as such, we are all eating fish that possibly might have been poisoned by these Chinese.

 

I have received reports that the company issued a press statement denying all culpability in this disaster. They are said to have claimed that they are licensed to operate by GIEPA and the Ministries of Fisheries and Trade of this country. Mr President, this statement was issued on the 22nd May, 2017 and still now, we haven’t heard from any of the government departments mentioned above.

 

When I wrote on this issue last time I sought to remind you that the first responsibility of a govement is to protect its citizens. If therefore a foreign company comes to our country and wreaks havoc on our ecosystem, our health and then is allowed to just pack up and go home, then your government would have failed in one of its most fundamental duties and responsibilities – the protection of citizens.

 

One would have expected that immediately the Chinese Company made that statement, the government departments concerned would come out and tell us their side of the story. Does their silent not show that the Chinese are right? Or, does it show that they do not care what happens to Gambians?

 

Mr President, we have passed a stage where we will allow every Tom, Dick and Harry would come and play with our intelligence and go scot free. We must set an example that we are ready to protect our own, that we care what happens to our citizens. Allowing this company to closedown without paying for the damage they have caused will be setting a bad precedent, and that we cannot afford to do. We must take legal action against them.

 

I stand with the people of Gunjur, Cartong, Tanji and all the coastal towns to demand an explanation and, Now!

 

Tha Scribbler Bah

A Concerned Citizen

 

 

Gambia Launches National Stakeholders Conference On Justice & Human Rights

 

By Lamin Sanyang

 

Gambia’s Chief Justice, Hassan B. Jallow has launched a national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights at Kairaba Beach Hotel.

The conference was attended by the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, The Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Minister of Women Affairs, Sierra Leon’s Attorney General, UN Human Rights Commissioner and Gambians of all walks of life particularly the law makers, judiciary, media and civil society groups.

Chief Justice Jallow in his launching remarks said democracy and rule of law are the basic foundation of any developed nation.

“Transitional justice is not an easy task, several steps were taken but there are still more to be taken,” Chief Justice Hassan B Jallow said.

Chief Justice Jallow highlighted on the need to strengthen the independence of the judiciary, ombudsman and constitute a national human rights commission. He called for national reconciliation and strengthening the criminal justice system. He further called on the need to promote access to justice for the victims of of human rights violations.

“We need to take difficult decisions…make sure the measures taken are implemented,” he asserted.

The Chief Justice before declaring the national stakeholders conference open, called on the establishment of non political bodies to further strengthen the reconciliation process for national unity.

“The Gambia has experienced two decades of authoritarian regime,” Abubakarr Tambadou, Attorney General and Minister of Justice said.

The Gambia’s Attorney General and Minister of Justice described the former regime as authoritarian calling it as the dark years of the country’s political history during which the citizenry were victims of torture, rape and secret burials among other human rights violations. He stated that the national stakeholders conference on justice and human rights was meant to discuss ideas to confront the challenges facing the country. He called on the participation of the government and non governmental organizations to restore the fundamental rights of the citizenry.

Minister Tambadou talked about the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and called for preventive mechanism by strengthening the legal instruments. He also talked about the training packages for the stakeholders particularly the security officers and media practitioners to strengthen transitional justice. He highlighted the government’s willingness to resume the Banjul Charter for Human Rights which was death for the past 22 years of dictatorship.

“Africa is rising and the Gambia cannot fail to take its part in this continental development,” said Joseph Camara, Attorney General and Minister of Justice for Sierra Leone.

The Sierra Leonean Justice Minister reiterated the importance of justice and human rights in building a nation, saying the past must be dealt with  to move forward as a nation.

“The first step to dictatorship is the death of justice,” Sierra Leone’s Justice Minister Camara pointed out.

Justice Minister Camara told the national stakeholders that the wind of change is blowing in Africa, as a new democratic leadership is emerging. Africans he added want leaders who respect justice, rule of law and human rights. He asserted that the perpetrators of crime must be brought to justice while the victims should be given opportunities to explain their stories, adding that the tools of mediation and dialogue are crucial.

“There is need to track cautiously in the search for justice,” he interjected.

He added:”The Gambia have to draw her own transitional justice base on their own context.”

The Sierra Leonean Justice Minister explained that the Gambia must take ownership of the transitional justice to earnestly work with the international community. He stated that the experience of one country cannot be use in another but lessons could be learn. He recommended the need to build institutions to block the past from repeating itself.

Putting an End to Impunity

 

As the government marches towards the establishment of a commission to look into the
atrocities of the Jammeh regime, it is important that it continues to engage the Gambian
citizens, especially the victims, and be upfront about what it is trying to do. It is
incumbent upon the government to explain to Gambians and friends of The Gambia the
nuances surrounding the so called Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
mechanism it wants to invoke. Some of us seem to place too much emphasis on the
reconciliation and forgiveness aspects of TRCs; thus prioritizing perpetrators of heinous
crimes over the victims of such crimes; and unwittingly promoting impunity in the
society. My focus is on the wisdom of discarding regular courts and replacing them with
commissions to deal with criminals. In other words, I am more concerned about the
vehicle we want to use to arrive at the reconciliation the government is seeking. I
submit that punishing criminals before regular courts and reconciling with criminals after
they have paid their debt to society are not mutually exclusive.

 
It is very important that people realize that the TRC concept goes against the norms of
civilized societies when it is used as a tool to avoid holding criminals accountable for
their crimes. Therefore, it is wrong to put victims and societies on the defensive, by
asking them at this early stage of the process to forgive their tormentors. Moreover, it
does not help to make it sound as if it is somehow uncivilized and vindictive for victims
to demand that criminals be punished. It is praiseworthy for people currently in power,
who suffered under the Jammeh regime, to now appear self-righteous and
magnanimous and willing to absolve criminals who wronged them in the past, including
criminals who never acknowledged wrongdoing, let alone seek forgiveness.

 
The other victims, however, should know that there is nothing wrong in demanding that
criminals in our society be punished for their crimes. That is a normal and civilized thing
to do. No civilized society should tolerate impunity. I reiterate that no one is asking for
revenge here. For instance, no one is demanding that Jammeh’s children be shot or he
himself and his vice president be summarily executed without trial, like they did to our
children on April 10 and 11, 2000. What the victims deserve is for the government to
apply our laws and international norms to hold people accountable and quit putting the
onus on the victims to forgive people who are not even looking for forgiveness.

 
When Gambia signed on to the Rome Statute, it “[affirmed] that the most serious crimes
of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that
their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and
by enhancing international cooperation.” Our government also pledged “to put an end
to impunity for the perpetrators of” certain crimes, including the cold-blooded massacre
of innocent and defenseless children on April 10 and 11, 2000. I call upon our
government to, at a minimum, honor its international obligations and take “measures at
the national level” to ensure that the April 10 and 11, 2000 Massacre is effectively
prosecuted and it “must not go unpunished.”

One can argue that the atrocities committed in The Gambia are not in the magnitude of

the genocides in other countries. But here is where Gambia steps up to serve as a
model for the world by showing that we will vigorously pursue justice even if only a
single Gambian is murdered by our political leaders. Let us be the nation that set the
threshold for prosecuting brutal political leaders who commit crimes against their
defenseless citizens. As I, and many, have argued, ours is not a polarized society where
you have hundreds of thousands of victims and perpetrators on opposing sides, ready
to plunge the society into chaos if perpetrators are punished for their crimes. Even
places such as Rwanda, with a far more complex situation than we are faced with,
ensured that certain criminals were appropriately prosecuted before putting forth
reconciliation mechanisms. We, on the other hand, have thousands of victims and a few
criminals in our midst, who can be dealt with through our regular courts. Setting up
another toothless commission to deal with the April 10 and 11, 2000 Massacre, for
instance, is akin to designing a solution for a problem that does not exist, in my humble
opinion.

The government will do a major disservice to the citizens if it lets murderers go scot-free
simply because they appeared before a commission of inquiry and confessed to their
crimes. The government should desist from putting pressure on the victims to reconcile
with perpetrators of heinous crimes who have not faced justice. Why can’t we put
pressure on the criminals to accept whatever punishment society imposes on them in
good faith and then seek the forgiveness of their victim? It is offensive to insinuate that
the victims are the bad guys here, because they do not want to forgive criminals. It is
equally condescending and offensive to say that it is uncouth and vindictive to demand
that criminals be punished for their crimes. The government should be putting all its
energy towards holding criminals accountable and ensuring that heinous crimes such as
the April 10 and 11, 2000 Massacre never happen in our society again.

Politicians in our midst would be within their rights if they wish to personally forgive
people like Jammeh because they want to woo Jammeh supporters or they are being
magnanimous. It is also understandable if, in the name of self-preservation, politicians
promote toothless commissions over regular courts, because they themselves would
prefer to be brought before a commission should they commit heinous crimes while in
office. Ordinary citizens, though, should never condone impunity; and should
vehemently oppose any ploy to encourage it in our society.

As the Barrow cabinet deliberates on the way forward and how to craft a comprehensive
TRC policy, I respectfully urge them to put the interests of the victims and society at
large ahead of the interests of criminals. There can be no genuine reconciliation if
victims feel that they are being forced to forgive perpetrators of crimes, who have not
shown any remorse and have not paid their debt to society. The true essence of a TRC
would be for perpetrators to openly confess their crimes and submit themselves to the
will of their victims and society at large, be it for appropriate punishment or forgiveness.
Perpetrators cannot be guaranteed the latter by the mere act of confession. An
essential part of taking responsibility, is accepting consequence.

Muhamad Sosseh, Esq.
Washington, DC
May 23, 2017

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION IN THE GAMBIA: A DISSENTING VIEW

0

 

By FODAY SAMATEH

 
I concede that my dissension constitutes a heresy. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) that’s about to be empaneled to preside over the unlawful deeds of the ousted regime is popular. What’s more, it’s a key goal of the new administration.

 
I concede further that when the Commission starts its assignment — the truth part of the equation at least — it will make a keen audience out of the nation. The testimonies of victims will force us to relive once more the evil so many suffered at the hands of the regime. And the Commission will surely receive good coverage from the international media and commendations from international organizations as another example of Africa moving in the right direction. Such organizations may even decide to bankroll the Commission.

 
So who could be opposed to such a good thing? This is the question the critics of the TRC will be expected to answer. But it’s a flawed question. It presumes the assumption that there are no better ways to find closure to the despotic rule.

 
The idea of truth and reconciliation had a nice ring to it on the campaign trail. It sent two different messages to two different audiences at the same time. The truth part was for the general public, especially the victims and their families, that the Coalition would investigate the regime. The reconciliation part was for the regime that the Coalition wouldn’t embark on a revenge mission. Given the stakes in challenging an entrenched, paranoid despot in an election, the mixed messages had a clever logic to them.
As a governing choice, however, truth and reconciliation is a confused policy pursued through bureaucratic conceit. Of course, just about everyone who hadn’t played a villain in the regime would love to see the truth come out. But what about the second part of the compound phrase — reconciliation? In theory, reconciliation is appealing. In the context of The Gambian situation, though, who will be reconciling with who? All the three examples — Sierra Leone, Rwanda, and South Africa — the advocates of the TRC advance as models share no resemblance to the our experience. There was no civil war in The Gambia as in the case of Sierra Leone. No ethnic genocide as in the case of Rwanda. No tribal government that enforced tribal discrimination in all spheres of society as in the case of racially-segregated South Africa.

 
What The Gambia experienced was brutal and cruel; and no rationalization must be attempted to mitigate its destructive force and consequences. Still, it was an old-fashioned despotism of a regime preying on its people. No tribal conflict. No regional conflict. No religious conflict. No conflict between the security forces and the civilian population. The despot targeted all elements of society and spared none. The result was a sea of victims who had been killed or violated by a small band of henchmen. The Gambian public, besides the regime’s network of informants, were not complicit in the extra judicial killings, disappearances, tortures, and detentions without trials. All tribes suffered under the regime. And the regime had recruited its gang of killers and torturers from all tribes. The question must be asked again: The TRC will be tasked to reconcile who with who in The Gambia? The gang of killers with their victim’s families? The torturers with the tortured? The rapist with the raped? If the answer is no, then why set up a commission for a purpose it won’t perform?

 
Some people may argue that the killers and torturers and rapists will come clean before the Commission and still be prosecuted for those crimes. Why will they incriminate themselves? The precondition of their testimony before the TRC will be a bargain: They will give the truth and get immunity. In the absence of such a legally binding guarantee, there is no power the Commission can summon to compel them to confess to their crimes. It is their Constitutional right not to testify against themselves if such evidence may be used against them in a future prosecution. As an aside, it is ironic, isn’t it, that thugs who beat confessions out of their victims will enjoy Constitutional protections against legal jeopardy. And if they are granted immunity for their testimonies, forget reconciliation. They walk. No courts can touch them for anything they admit to before the TRC. Is that what we want?

 
Lest we forget, both Sierra Leone and Rwanda had set up UN-backed tribunals to prosecute those most responsible for the bloodbaths in the two countries. The truth and reconciliations were for the thousands of ordinary people who had taken part in the civil war and the genocide respectively. To prosecute everyone who had participated in those conflicts would most likely result in the two very broken nations turning on themselves all over again. Thankfully, The Gambia doesn’t have that problem. A very small number of goons were, on the orders of the despot, responsible for most of the crimes. They need to face justice; not a truth and reconciliation commission.

 
Even the administration or some part of it seems to think so. The police, acting on the directives of the Ministry of Interior, have made some arrests with regard to some high profile murders. They have also gone to court to secure indictments and arrest warrants in other cases, and have applied for extradition of some alleged killers of the regime. All those cases will be tried in the criminal courts. Kudos to these legal remedies. At the same time, it shouldn’t be lost on anyone that these actions are taking the wind out of the sail of the TRC.

 
The president, too, has been saying since the election that there will be truth and reconciliation, but there will be justice also. Whether he gives these assurances because he is aware of the growing demands to prosecute the crimes of the regime is unclear. And neither he nor any relevant official of his administration has given a policy speech to justify the necessity of truth and reconciliation, and clarify what levels of crime will fall under its purview and what will be referred for prosecution. The often repeated “We need to know what happened” is trite. It’s not a clarification or a justification.

 
The Justice Minister’s argument that we need the TRC to expose the atrocities of the regime for the nation to learn from them and prevent any recurrence of such atrocities in the future is a lame cliche. He’s a minister for justice, not a minister for national therapy. There are many ways we can both punish the crimes of the regime and learn from them without merely imitating what other countries did in their own unique situations. As already pointed out above, what had happened in Sierra Leone and Rwanda were not cognate to what happened in The Gambia. And certainly, what happened in The Gambia was not born of any collective national ignorance. The regime indulged itself in a culture of impunity. And the best antidote to that is to hold its small number of perpetrators accountable to the fullest extent of the law. Charges must be brought in every case that’s provable in court. With that precedence set in our jurisprudence, people will disobey unlawful orders to commit crimes. Reconciliation will more likely incentivize people with the belief that they can commit the unlawful and still be forgiven.

 
Besides the criminal acts, the regime engaged in a culture of corruption. The nation’s resources were misappropriated with abandon on the despot’s behalf. Should those officials who helped defraud the nation be given a pass by the TRC if they own up their roles? Again, based on the despot’s modus operandi, a very small cadre of top officials could have been involved in these corrupt practices. The book must be thrown at all those who broke the law. It’s as simple as that. The despot had set up commissions of inquiry into his predecessor’s administration in the name of rooting out “rampant corruption.” He and his enablers must be given a taste of his own medicine.

 
The legal proceedings will reveal the truth about the regime. In addition, the president or the National Assembly can appoint a commission to investigate and issue a comprehensive report on the crimes of the regime. This commission’s work will have no bearing on the criminal prosecutions much less impede them. That way, we can have both wholesale truth about the regime and justice for its crimes or most of its crimes.

Reset password

Enter your email address and we will send you a link to change your password.

Get started with your account

to save your favourite homes and more

Sign up with email

Get started with your account

to save your favourite homes and more

By clicking the «SIGN UP» button you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
Powered by Estatik