FOROYAA Newspaper (Serrekunda)
Suwaibou Touray
10 July 2009
opinion
We have been focusing on politics in this column with the objective to document the history of the Gambia and to help our readers appraise themselves with the happenings of the past.
We are now covering issues that culminated during the coup period of 1994. This we hope will go a long way in helping us to have a better understanding of the evolution of politics in the Gambia as well as help us to forge a future genuine democratic dispensation for our homeland.
In this edition, we shall continue to follow the judgment delivered by the magistrate, Mr. Lamin Mboge on the trial. Let us continue from where we stopped.
The trial Magistrate, Mr. Lamin Mboge in delivering his judgment noted that Halifa tendered a letter to the African Commission (Defence Exhibit B1) and their reply (Defence Exhibit C); a letter dated 9th May 1994 about the health conditions of the workers (Defence Exhibit C l). The magistrate indicated that even though the latter appears to be in the public interest, it together with the other two is not relevant since it was before the Decree came into effect.
He noted that Halifa said that after 22 July, FOROYAA continued its responsibility to play the role that it was playing since its inception that is to scrutinize the activities of those in authority and make suggestions.
Defence Exhibit F2 dated 24 July included an article entitled "THE ARMY TOPPLES THE PPP GOVERNMENT" and "PDOIS' POSITION ON THE CURRENT POLITICAL SITUATION". He said that this does not avail them a defense since it was published before Decree No. 4 came into existence.
Defence Exhibit F3 dated 27 December (Communiqué No. 1 on GOVERNANCE and A LETTER FROM A MEMBER OF PDOIS). He argued that the mere fact that the letter is in a FOROYAA newspaper bearing the party symbol and also an organ of PDOIS is a clear testimony that the newspaper is in the interest of a political party, although the contents may be in the interest of the public, that since this was published before Decree No. 4 came into effect, it does not avail the accused any defence.
Defence Exhibit F4 was on "HOW TO HANDLE THE "ECONOMY" (COMMUNIQUE NO. 2) and the first press conference of the Chairman of the AFPRC; that Halifa said that Defence Exhibit F4 has analyzed government finances, explains the essence of the consolidated Revenue Fund, the role of the treasury, the external reserves of the country, the Central Bank, etc; that the object was to enable ruling council to understand the economic issues that are involved in their transition phase; that the fact 'that FOROYAA published the views of the AFPRC Chairman confirms that the object was not political propaganda in the interest of a po1itical party; that the object was to fulfill a duty, in the interest of the nation and her people. The Magistrate then said that he agreed entirely with the accused in this submission but that this exhibit was published before Decree No. 4 came into effect; that he would, however, give some consideration to it.
Defence Exhibit F5 deals with the conditions of detainees and Halifa said they are produced in the just interest of the people of this country. He then asked, whether the accused are the custodians of the people's rights and said that whatever they do in defending the rights of the people must be done within the four corners of the law; that any human rights campaign outside the precincts of the law is illegal and unlawful and will be punished.
Defence Exhibit G entitled "A CALL FOR JUSTICE AND DEMOCRACY", he said, is the most significant of all the documents produced by Halifa. He then read the following portions, which, he considered relevant:
"The assumptions were, however, short lived when Decrees started appearing which abolished the existence of political parties, political activities and the dissemination of political ideas. This struck the readers of FOROYAA like a thunderbolt from the blue. People began to wonder what your motives are. In short, you promised to promote democracy. Democracy, however, is inconceivable without the right of the people to change their manner of government."
"Now, may we ask: If people are dissatisfied with your manner of government, how will they bring about change? You have not provided any democratic avenue for people. Have you forgotten Sankara's words that a soldier without political education is a virtual criminal? Such a soldier believes in nothing but the power of the gun. Such a soldier becomes a sadist who enjoys seeing people behave like toys under his command. Such a soldier enjoys inf1ictng pain just to trample dignified human beings under foot. Of course, we do understand the nature of the army under the Jawara regime....
"In a society led by PDOIS, such a consciousness will disappear. The task of defending the country shall be the responsibility of all able-bodied citizens. Soldiers and security forces shall be given training in any area of civil life they would want to pursue while not on active service. Those who aim to be professionals would be given the same income as any engineer who knows his or her job. With the establishment of principles requiring so1diers not to be subjected to any arbitrary arrest or punishment by Senior officers, as well as improvement of living conditions in army quarters to ensure decent living, frustration will be wiped out. With the reduction of the salaries of the President and ministers to that of engineers and other professionals, the need to carry out coup d'etat to enjoy privileges would be eradicated A people's liberation army would be born. The heart beat of such soldiers will beat in unison with the heart beats of their people. A peaceful, democratic and prosperous society, which knows no fear or injustice, shall be born; this is the aim of PDOIS.
"At the moment, history calls on you to commit no atrocities, violate no fundamental rights and freedoms, create no climate of fear, suppress no freedom of thought, allow free flow of ideas, ensure accountability and set the country on the trail of democratic existence by calling a national conference to determine how and when elections are to take place. This is the only way you can be absolved by history, the greatest judge of events...."
The Magistrate then said that this is not only an expression of opinion by the custodians of FOROYAA and PDOIS but direct commandments on how to run the affairs of the state; that this paper is in the interest of PDOIS because it was written and published on behalf of a political party by the custodians of a political party and FOROYAA, but the contents are in the interest of the general public; that yet the contents are so daring and challenging that one may conclude that it is a direct challenge to the authority of the state, since the authors published it after they became aware of Decree No. 4; that since it is both in the public interest and PDOIS', it is neutralized and has no effect that it would have been different had the party symbol not appeared but that the name of the party did appear and it was clearly, written by the accused as editors and publishers of FOROYAA for the interest of the public is paramount to the interest of a party but that the interest of the state prevail s over all others; that the exhibit would have availed them a good defence if it was headed FOROYAA and nothing more; that Halifa said that Decree
No. 4 was considered a threat" to his fundamental right and freedom and the Gambian people, at large and that this is what gave rise to the publication of this exhibit; that this is the only exhibit he considered relevant in the trial for the defence of the accused that whether it is a contravention of Decree 4 is a question of facts and law.
The Magistrate then noted that Halifa said under cross examination that he published FOROYAA in pursuit of his fundamental rights and freedoms; that he continued to publish after he was aware of the coming into force of Decree No. 4; that he himself and Sidia were the custodians of PDOIS and FOROYAA; that he registered FOROYAA; that he read out his affidavit as follows: "I, Halifa Sallah of Serrekunda, acting on behalf of the Central Committee of PDOIS makes oath and affirm as follows; that according to paragraph (c)he shall be the proprietor, publisher and editor of FOROYAA; that it was a mandate from the Central Committee; that FOROYAA would be owned by PDOIS
He also noted that Halifa indicated that he agreed that he is also a po1itician and subscribes 100% to the ideas of PDOIS; that PDOIS is not interested in getting to the top without the consent of the people but would run the country if placed at the helm; that he sold FOROYAA everywhere; that there was no dispute that they printed the papers which are now the issue before the court. .
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
