 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Momodou
Denmark
11735 Posts |
 Posted - 04 Aug 2006 : 21:00:30
|
THE NADD AND UDP/NRP VIEWS ON UNITY
Even though the views of the two Alliances are different, forces are at work to influence the two sides to work to reconcile their differences.
Will they succeed or will they not?
That is the question.
Below are three letters in the issue.
UDP/NRP ALLIANCE PROPOSAL FOR A COMMON FRONT BY ALL OPPOSITION PARTIES IN THE SEPTEMBER 2006PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
It is within the spirit of our common objective to bring about a change of the present status quo in The Gambia and restore genuine democracy, freedom, rule of law and real economic development that we take this initiative to invite you to discuss and agree on a proposal to establish a common front in order to contest and hopefully win the 2006 presidential elections.
You will recall that Mr. Ousainou Darboe and Amadou Taal had met with Hon. Halifa Sallah of NADD to discuss acceptable arrangements towards a united front of the opposition in the 2006 presidential elections and the 2007 National Assembly Elections. These discussions were supposed to continue after each side had consulted with its Executive Committee for endorsement.
We in the UDP/NRP Alliance have since had a meeting of our joint National Executive Committee. The joint Executive Committee has mandated Mr. Darboe to pursue the discussions with NADD as quickly as possible. We have since been waiting to hear from Hon. Halifa Sallah so that discussions could resume.
The membership of UDP/NRP Alliance and NADD are well conscious of the fact that the elections are just around the corner and there is not much time at our disposal. In view of the time constraint the UDP/NRP Alliance formally invites you to consider the following proposals for a united front of opposition parties and these are:
1) The UDP/NRP Alliance be expanded to include NADD
2) ‘That the new Alliance adopts a single flag bearer to contest the
2006 presidential elections.
3) That the whole activities of the elections be governed by the dictates of the present Constitutions.
4) That the issue of allocating portfolios and responsibilities be shelved and that the Alliance concentrates on the principles of regime change which will ultimately lead to a system change.
5) That after the elections and provided that the expanded Alliance wins the elections arrangements be made for organizing a National Constitutional Review Conference within a period of three months after the National Assembly Elections.
6) The recommendations of the Conference will be the subject of a referendum and thereafter be submitted to the National Assembly for adoption and ratification.
It is our belief that only the Gambian people can determine how the affairs of this country should be administered and all other actors are to abide by the dictates and the will of the people.
It is in this regard that we take serious cognizance of the efforts and the initiatives of the Gambians in the diaspora as well as groups of concerned Gambians resident within the country. Both have been making tremendous efforts to ensure that the opposition remains a united front and to contest the presidential elections under one umbrella.
Mr. Hamat Bah who was on a recent visit to the USA met with Gambians who emphasized and reiterated their concern to foster unity within the opposition. The same trend is currently being pursued by a group of concerned Gambians representing all works of life within the country. This group has met Hon. Halifa Sallah, Mr. Hamat Bah and the undersigned and all promised to make all efforts for the creation of a united front against the present regime.
Finally, we believe that we should meet at your earliest convenience so that our agreement can be reached as soon as possible given that we have very limited time for the September 2006 elections.
(OUSAINOU DARBOE FOR UDP/NRP ALLIANCE)
Halifa’s letter to Darboe
OBSERVATIONS BEFORE NADD’S RESPONSE
I write to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 27th July 2006.
History has placed on our shoulders exceptional responsibilities which we have to carry with honesty, sincerity and objectivity. During our informal discussion I had indicated to you that if we fail to do what is demanded by our times and circumstances history will indict all of us; that I, Halifa Sallah, have no ambition to seek political office for its sake; that I accepted to be flag bearer in answer to the call of duty; that I will not hesitate to relinquish the responsibility if it is demanded by the call of destiny.
It is therefore necessary to convey my personal opinion to you before transmitting the position of the Executive Committee of NADD. First and foremost, it is important to recall that our discussion started as an informal one. Viewpoints were expressed, confidentiality sought and a plan of action proposed.
A summation of my views is necessary to put the record straight. I indicated that, when we first met to discuss about unity among the opposition we had the option to unite around one party and its leader to contest the 2006 presidential election or create an umbrella party and select a flagbearer to serve as a unifying factor. I emphasized that we created NADD because no party or leader at the time could have served as our unifying factor, on the basis of his/her personal and party’s strength.
I stressed that the equality advocated by NADD provided the basis for its collective ownership by all parties. It was envisaged that such collective ownership will motivate all the supporters of the various parties to support NADD candidates. NADD therefore provided the basis for support irrespective of gender, party, tribe or other affiliations. I added that NADD has been tested and what may be the problem is the person selected as flagbearer. I emphasized that if any body could be found who could better serve as a unifying factor I will be willing to step aside for the person to be a flag bearer. You also expressed your opinion.
After hearing your opinion we decided to move into some concrete issues. Here again, I reiterated that unlike NADD the UDP/NRP Alliance has not elaborated on a Memorandum of Understanding that spells out its strategic objectives and basis of unity. On the other hand NADD makes it very clear that a transitional arrangement should follow the ousting of the APRC regime characterized by collective leadership, a five year transitional mandate for the president, constitutional, administrative and legal reform and the creation of a level ground for the subsequent presidential election. I indicated to you that the NADD Memorandum explains how a flagbearer can be selected by consensus or a primary. On the other hand I pointed out that the UDP/NRP alliance has not worked out these details.
We finally agreed that your alliance will seek to formulate a proposal to be placed side by side to the NADD arrangement for discussion by the Executive of the two alliances. Immediately after our meeting, I came across a report on what Mr. Hamat Bah had said in the US and forwarded it to you for clarification as a matter of urgency.
Mr. Bah stated the following: “We made serious mistakes in our negotiations. We should not have in the first place accepted equal representation. That was our mistake. And it was this mistake that led to the fall out.”
Mr. Bah added: “I will not disclose the discussions going on at the moment between the two alliances. But I will tell you we will agree on a flagbearer. What complicated the negotiations is that NADD wanted positions, they wanted the cake that is not yet baked.
“This is the problem. I have made it very clear. I will not endorse anyone for the flagbearer except Darboe. The president has the mandate of who will be the vice president and whatever Ousainou will exercise that right. For now, let’s just file one candidate. We are not going to make any agreement as to who is to occupy which position. The president will do that.”
After the assertion of this uncompromising statement by your partner what was there to negotiate? Let me ask you these basic questions which the Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you for clarification. Before Mr. Bah went to the US was any negotiation between the Alliances in progress? The answer must definitely be in the negative.
Secondly, did we discuss anything dealing with the sharing of positions which complicated negotiations? Obviously, if no negotiation was in progress it is equally obvious that nothing dealing with positions, that could complicate negotiation, could have been a subject of discussion.
The Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you that after a flag bearer was selected by NADD no meeting had ever been convened even by NADD to talk about the sharing of position. This concept is just part of spirit of the Memorandum of Understanding. Hence they could not understand Mr. Bah’s motive for making the unfounded remarks that NADD wanted the sharing of a cake that is not baked. I decided to withhold the letter that I should have conveyed to you to request for clarification as to whether our personal and informal discussion is what was being misconstrued by Mr. Bah as a negotiation. I decided to withhold the letter until I could give further information to the NADD Executive Committee because of a call I received from Mr. Musa Sanneh indicating that Mr. Bah had assured them that he would pioneer the necessary momentum to put an end to any misunderstanding and facilitate a conducive environment for negotiation. Of course we have not heard from Mr. Bah since he came back.
Mr Darboe, you will agree with me that given the categorical remarks made by your partner that your Alliance will not enter into any alliance that guarantees equal representation during negotiations I was right to stop all discussions to avoid giving any legitimacy to incorrect notions propagated by your him in the USA.
We therefore hope that you will now agree for all the correspondence between the two Alliances to be done in public so that no person will ever claim to have privileged knowledge and confuse our supporters at home and abroad.
The NADD Executive Committee asked me to convey to you that it is not interested in any alliance that will not guarantee the sovereign equality of all member parties.
Now that you have written a proposal to the NADD Executive it will convey an appropriate and timely response. I hope you will give a copy of your letter to NADD to the group of Gambians who are currently serving as a catalyst to the negotiation. I will give them a copy to start the process of transparency and accountability for all our actions for posterity.
Yours in the service of the Nation,
Halifa Sallah.
Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 61/2006, 4-6 August, 2006
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2006 : 21:16:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Momodou
THE NADD AND UDP/NRP VIEWS ON UNITY
Even though the views of the two Alliances are different, forces are at work to influence the two sides to work to reconcile their differences.
Will they succeed or will they not?
That is the question.
Below are three letters in the issue.
UDP/NRP ALLIANCE PROPOSAL FOR A COMMON FRONT BY ALL OPPOSITION PARTIES IN THE SEPTEMBER 2006PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
It is within the spirit of our common objective to bring about a change of the present status quo in The Gambia and restore genuine democracy, freedom, rule of law and real economic development that we take this initiative to invite you to discuss and agree on a proposal to establish a common front in order to contest and hopefully win the 2006 presidential elections.
You will recall that Mr. Ousainou Darboe and Amadou Taal had met with Hon. Halifa Sallah of NADD to discuss acceptable arrangements towards a united front of the opposition in the 2006 presidential elections and the 2007 National Assembly Elections. These discussions were supposed to continue after each side had consulted with its Executive Committee for endorsement.
We in the UDP/NRP Alliance have since had a meeting of our joint National Executive Committee. The joint Executive Committee has mandated Mr. Darboe to pursue the discussions with NADD as quickly as possible. We have since been waiting to hear from Hon. Halifa Sallah so that discussions could resume.
The membership of UDP/NRP Alliance and NADD are well conscious of the fact that the elections are just around the corner and there is not much time at our disposal. In view of the time constraint the UDP/NRP Alliance formally invites you to consider the following proposals for a united front of opposition parties and these are:
1) The UDP/NRP Alliance be expanded to include NADD
2) ?That the new Alliance adopts a single flag bearer to contest the
2006 presidential elections.
3) That the whole activities of the elections be governed by the dictates of the present Constitutions.
4) That the issue of allocating portfolios and responsibilities be shelved and that the Alliance concentrates on the principles of regime change which will ultimately lead to a system change.
5) That after the elections and provided that the expanded Alliance wins the elections arrangements be made for organizing a National Constitutional Review Conference within a period of three months after the National Assembly Elections.
6) The recommendations of the Conference will be the subject of a referendum and thereafter be submitted to the National Assembly for adoption and ratification.
It is our belief that only the Gambian people can determine how the affairs of this country should be administered and all other actors are to abide by the dictates and the will of the people.
It is in this regard that we take serious cognizance of the efforts and the initiatives of the Gambians in the diaspora as well as groups of concerned Gambians resident within the country. Both have been making tremendous efforts to ensure that the opposition remains a united front and to contest the presidential elections under one umbrella.
Mr. Hamat Bah who was on a recent visit to the USA met with Gambians who emphasized and reiterated their concern to foster unity within the opposition. The same trend is currently being pursued by a group of concerned Gambians representing all works of life within the country. This group has met Hon.? Halifa Sallah, Mr. Hamat Bah and the undersigned and all promised to make all efforts for the creation of a united front against the present regime.
Finally, we believe that we should meet at your earliest convenience so that our agreement can be reached as soon as possible given that we have very limited time for the September 2006 elections.
(OUSAINOU DARBOE FOR UDP/NRP ALLIANCE)
Halifa?s letter to Darboe
OBSERVATIONS BEFORE NADD?S RESPONSE
I write to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 27th?July 2006.
History has placed on our shoulders exceptional responsibilities which we have to carry with honesty, sincerity and objectivity.? During our informal discussion I had indicated to you that if we fail to do what is demanded by our times and circumstances history will indict all of us; that I, Halifa Sallah, have no ambition to seek political office for its sake; that I accepted to be flag bearer in answer to the call of duty; that I will not hesitate to relinquish the responsibility if it is demanded by the call of destiny.
It is therefore necessary to convey my personal opinion to you before transmitting the position of the Executive Committee of NADD.? First and foremost, it is important to recall that our discussion started as an informal one.? Viewpoints were expressed, confidentiality sought and a plan of action proposed.
A summation of my views is necessary to put the record straight.? I indicated that, when we first met to discuss about unity among the opposition we had the option to unite around one party and its leader to contest the 2006 presidential election or create an umbrella party and select a flagbearer to serve as a unifying factor.? I emphasized that we created NADD because no party or leader at the time could have served as our unifying factor, on the basis of his/her personal and party?s strength.
I stressed that the equality advocated by NADD provided the basis for its collective ownership by all parties.? It was envisaged that such collective ownership will motivate all the supporters of the various parties to support NADD candidates.? NADD therefore provided the basis for support irrespective of gender, party, tribe or other affiliations.? I added that NADD has been tested and what may be the problem is the person selected as flagbearer.? I emphasized that if any body could be found who could better serve as a unifying factor I will be willing to step aside for the person to be a flag bearer. You also expressed your opinion.?
After hearing your opinion we decided to move into some concrete issues.? Here again, I reiterated that unlike NADD the UDP/NRP Alliance has not elaborated on a Memorandum of Understanding that spells out its strategic objectives and basis of unity.? On the other hand NADD makes it very clear that a transitional arrangement should follow the ousting of the APRC regime characterized by collective leadership, a five year transitional mandate for the president, constitutional, administrative and legal reform and the creation of a level ground for the subsequent presidential election.? I indicated to you that the NADD Memorandum explains how a flagbearer can be selected by consensus or a primary.? On the other hand I pointed out that the UDP/NRP alliance has not worked out these details.
We finally agreed that your alliance will seek to formulate a proposal to be placed side by side to the NADD arrangement for discussion by the Executive of the two alliances.? Immediately after our meeting, I came across a report on what Mr. Hamat Bah had said in the US and forwarded it to you for clarification as a matter of urgency.
Mr. Bah stated the following: ?We made serious mistakes in our negotiations. We should not have in the first place accepted equal representation. That was our mistake. And it was this mistake that led to the fall out.?
Mr. Bah added: ?I will not disclose the discussions going on at the moment between the two alliances. But I will tell you we will agree on a flagbearer. What complicated the negotiations is that NADD wanted positions, they wanted the cake that is not yet baked.
?This is the problem. I have made it very clear. I will not endorse anyone for the flagbearer except Darboe. The president has the mandate of who will be the vice president and whatever Ousainou will exercise that right. For now, let?s just file one candidate. We are not going to make any agreement as to who is to occupy which position. The president will do that.?
After the assertion of this uncompromising statement by your partner what was there to negotiate? Let me ask you these basic questions which the Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you for clarification. Before Mr. Bah went to the US was any negotiation between the Alliances in progress? The answer must definitely be in the negative.
Secondly, did we discuss anything dealing with the sharing of positions which complicated negotiations? Obviously, if no negotiation was in progress it is equally obvious that nothing dealing with positions, that could complicate negotiation, could have been a subject of discussion.
The Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you that after a flag bearer was selected by NADD no meeting had ever been convened even by NADD to talk about the sharing of position.? This concept is just part of spirit of the Memorandum of Understanding. Hence they could not understand Mr. Bah?s motive for making the unfounded remarks that NADD wanted the sharing of a cake that is not baked. I decided to withhold the letter that I should have conveyed to you to request for clarification as to whether our personal and informal discussion is what was being misconstrued by Mr. Bah as a negotiation. I decided to withhold the letter until I could give further information to the NADD Executive Committee because of a call I received from Mr. Musa Sanneh indicating that Mr. Bah had assured them that he would pioneer the necessary momentum to put an end to any misunderstanding and facilitate a conducive environment for negotiation. Of course we have not heard from Mr. Bah since he came back.
Mr Darboe, you will agree with me that given the categorical remarks made by your partner that your Alliance will not enter into any alliance that guarantees equal representation during negotiations I was right to stop all discussions to avoid giving any legitimacy to incorrect notions propagated by your him in the USA.
We therefore hope that you will now agree for all the correspondence between the two Alliances to be done in public so that no person will ever claim to have privileged knowledge and confuse our supporters at home and abroad.
The NADD Executive Committee asked me to convey to you that it is not interested in any alliance that will not guarantee the sovereign equality of all member parties.
Now that you have written a proposal to the NADD Executive it will convey an appropriate and timely response. I hope you will give a copy of your letter to NADD to the group of Gambians who are currently serving as a catalyst to the negotiation. I will give them a copy to start the process of transparency and accountability for all our actions for posterity.
Yours in the service of the Nation,
Halifa Sallah.
Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 61/2006, 4-6 August, 2006
Day is breaking soon. That's what all look forward to. "ngonnih yirti, ngonnyata wotto.", Halpular. It simply translates when one fools you to eat your dinner, he cannot fool you to take your lunch.
I wish fruition will come of it. allahuma ameeeeeeeeeen ! |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
 |
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2006 : 21:22:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Momodou
THE NADD AND UDP/NRP VIEWS ON UNITY
Even though the views of the two Alliances are different, forces are at work to influence the two sides to work to reconcile their differences.
Will they succeed or will they not?
That is the question.
Below are three letters in the issue.
UDP/NRP ALLIANCE PROPOSAL FOR A COMMON FRONT BY ALL OPPOSITION PARTIES IN THE SEPTEMBER 2006PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
It is within the spirit of our common objective to bring about a change of the present status quo in The Gambia and restore genuine democracy, freedom, rule of law and real economic development that we take this initiative to invite you to discuss and agree on a proposal to establish a common front in order to contest and hopefully win the 2006 presidential elections.
You will recall that Mr. Ousainou Darboe and Amadou Taal had met with Hon. Halifa Sallah of NADD to discuss acceptable arrangements towards a united front of the opposition in the 2006 presidential elections and the 2007 National Assembly Elections. These discussions were supposed to continue after each side had consulted with its Executive Committee for endorsement.
We in the UDP/NRP Alliance have since had a meeting of our joint National Executive Committee. The joint Executive Committee has mandated Mr. Darboe to pursue the discussions with NADD as quickly as possible. We have since been waiting to hear from Hon. Halifa Sallah so that discussions could resume.
The membership of UDP/NRP Alliance and NADD are well conscious of the fact that the elections are just around the corner and there is not much time at our disposal. In view of the time constraint the UDP/NRP Alliance formally invites you to consider the following proposals for a united front of opposition parties and these are:
1) The UDP/NRP Alliance be expanded to include NADD
2) ‘That the new Alliance adopts a single flag bearer to contest the
2006 presidential elections.
3) That the whole activities of the elections be governed by the dictates of the present Constitutions.
4) That the issue of allocating portfolios and responsibilities be shelved and that the Alliance concentrates on the principles of regime change which will ultimately lead to a system change.
5) That after the elections and provided that the expanded Alliance wins the elections arrangements be made for organizing a National Constitutional Review Conference within a period of three months after the National Assembly Elections.
6) The recommendations of the Conference will be the subject of a referendum and thereafter be submitted to the National Assembly for adoption and ratification.
It is our belief that only the Gambian people can determine how the affairs of this country should be administered and all other actors are to abide by the dictates and the will of the people.
It is in this regard that we take serious cognizance of the efforts and the initiatives of the Gambians in the diaspora as well as groups of concerned Gambians resident within the country. Both have been making tremendous efforts to ensure that the opposition remains a united front and to contest the presidential elections under one umbrella.
Mr. Hamat Bah who was on a recent visit to the USA met with Gambians who emphasized and reiterated their concern to foster unity within the opposition. The same trend is currently being pursued by a group of concerned Gambians representing all works of life within the country. This group has met Hon. Halifa Sallah, Mr. Hamat Bah and the undersigned and all promised to make all efforts for the creation of a united front against the present regime.
Finally, we believe that we should meet at your earliest convenience so that our agreement can be reached as soon as possible given that we have very limited time for the September 2006 elections.
(OUSAINOU DARBOE FOR UDP/NRP ALLIANCE)
Halifa’s letter to Darboe
OBSERVATIONS BEFORE NADD’S RESPONSE
I write to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 27th July 2006.
History has placed on our shoulders exceptional responsibilities which we have to carry with honesty, sincerity and objectivity. During our informal discussion I had indicated to you that if we fail to do what is demanded by our times and circumstances history will indict all of us; that I, Halifa Sallah, have no ambition to seek political office for its sake; that I accepted to be flag bearer in answer to the call of duty; that I will not hesitate to relinquish the responsibility if it is demanded by the call of destiny.
It is therefore necessary to convey my personal opinion to you before transmitting the position of the Executive Committee of NADD. First and foremost, it is important to recall that our discussion started as an informal one. Viewpoints were expressed, confidentiality sought and a plan of action proposed.
A summation of my views is necessary to put the record straight. I indicated that, when we first met to discuss about unity among the opposition we had the option to unite around one party and its leader to contest the 2006 presidential election or create an umbrella party and select a flagbearer to serve as a unifying factor. I emphasized that we created NADD because no party or leader at the time could have served as our unifying factor, on the basis of his/her personal and party’s strength.
I stressed that the equality advocated by NADD provided the basis for its collective ownership by all parties. It was envisaged that such collective ownership will motivate all the supporters of the various parties to support NADD candidates. NADD therefore provided the basis for support irrespective of gender, party, tribe or other affiliations. I added that NADD has been tested and what may be the problem is the person selected as flagbearer. I emphasized that if any body could be found who could better serve as a unifying factor I will be willing to step aside for the person to be a flag bearer. You also expressed your opinion.
After hearing your opinion we decided to move into some concrete issues. Here again, I reiterated that unlike NADD the UDP/NRP Alliance has not elaborated on a Memorandum of Understanding that spells out its strategic objectives and basis of unity. On the other hand NADD makes it very clear that a transitional arrangement should follow the ousting of the APRC regime characterized by collective leadership, a five year transitional mandate for the president, constitutional, administrative and legal reform and the creation of a level ground for the subsequent presidential election. I indicated to you that the NADD Memorandum explains how a flagbearer can be selected by consensus or a primary. On the other hand I pointed out that the UDP/NRP alliance has not worked out these details.
We finally agreed that your alliance will seek to formulate a proposal to be placed side by side to the NADD arrangement for discussion by the Executive of the two alliances. Immediately after our meeting, I came across a report on what Mr. Hamat Bah had said in the US and forwarded it to you for clarification as a matter of urgency.
Mr. Bah stated the following: “We made serious mistakes in our negotiations. We should not have in the first place accepted equal representation. That was our mistake. And it was this mistake that led to the fall out.”
Mr. Bah added: “I will not disclose the discussions going on at the moment between the two alliances. But I will tell you we will agree on a flagbearer. What complicated the negotiations is that NADD wanted positions, they wanted the cake that is not yet baked.
“This is the problem. I have made it very clear. I will not endorse anyone for the flagbearer except Darboe. The president has the mandate of who will be the vice president and whatever Ousainou will exercise that right. For now, let’s just file one candidate. We are not going to make any agreement as to who is to occupy which position. The president will do that.”
After the assertion of this uncompromising statement by your partner what was there to negotiate? Let me ask you these basic questions which the Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you for clarification. Before Mr. Bah went to the US was any negotiation between the Alliances in progress? The answer must definitely be in the negative.
Secondly, did we discuss anything dealing with the sharing of positions which complicated negotiations? Obviously, if no negotiation was in progress it is equally obvious that nothing dealing with positions, that could complicate negotiation, could have been a subject of discussion.
The Executive Committee of NADD wanted me to convey to you that after a flag bearer was selected by NADD no meeting had ever been convened even by NADD to talk about the sharing of position. This concept is just part of spirit of the Memorandum of Understanding. Hence they could not understand Mr. Bah’s motive for making the unfounded remarks that NADD wanted the sharing of a cake that is not baked. I decided to withhold the letter that I should have conveyed to you to request for clarification as to whether our personal and informal discussion is what was being misconstrued by Mr. Bah as a negotiation. I decided to withhold the letter until I could give further information to the NADD Executive Committee because of a call I received from Mr. Musa Sanneh indicating that Mr. Bah had assured them that he would pioneer the necessary momentum to put an end to any misunderstanding and facilitate a conducive environment for negotiation. Of course we have not heard from Mr. Bah since he came back.
Mr Darboe, you will agree with me that given the categorical remarks made by your partner that your Alliance will not enter into any alliance that guarantees equal representation during negotiations I was right to stop all discussions to avoid giving any legitimacy to incorrect notions propagated by your him in the USA.
We therefore hope that you will now agree for all the correspondence between the two Alliances to be done in public so that no person will ever claim to have privileged knowledge and confuse our supporters at home and abroad.
The NADD Executive Committee asked me to convey to you that it is not interested in any alliance that will not guarantee the sovereign equality of all member parties.
Now that you have written a proposal to the NADD Executive it will convey an appropriate and timely response. I hope you will give a copy of your letter to NADD to the group of Gambians who are currently serving as a catalyst to the negotiation. I will give them a copy to start the process of transparency and accountability for all our actions for posterity.
Yours in the service of the Nation,
Halifa Sallah.
Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 61/2006, 4-6 August, 2006
dALTON1
I hope this confirms my posting that Ousainou did approach NADD for discussion. The official letter was from UDP/NRP alliance as confirmed in this Foroyya article. |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2006 : 21:27:27
|
Kons.
Is there any chance from the people ? I mean, are the people giving them any chance ? When the other open calls, calling on the opposing party to come up with proposals, and to define it well. It's an answer to a request. I know that much. Go back to threads in here, just one week old. Now, you will get it.
Later, Dalton. |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2006 : 21:45:53
|
My only problem is that NADD is bent on so rigid principles that the talks will fail. I dont like some of the statements in Halifa's letter like
Mr Darboe, you will agree with me that given the categorical remarks made by your partner that your Alliance will not enter into any alliance that guarantees equal representation during negotiations I was right to stop all discussions to avoid giving any legitimacy to incorrect notions propagated by your him in the USA.
The NADD Executive Committee asked me to convey to you that it is not interested in any alliance that will not guarantee the sovereign equality of all member parties.
When you begin to assert who is right or wrong, you take a defensive mode and obviously they will not want to be wrong either.
Secondly, saying that NADD will not be part of a group that does not guarantee the sovereign equality of memeber parties is too far. Darboe as head of the party never said that the parties are unequal. Hamat may have said that but there is a reason why a party has a leadership and not a central committee. Even in communist societies with Central Committees there is a chairperson.
The tone of the letter is aggressive and is not written in the spirit of a fruitful start.
Dont get me wrong but i think it should sound a bit reconciliatory. At least thats my view. It seems to be putting the blames on the doors of UDP/NRD. At this stage we should not talk about who is right or wrong. What we need iis to get to the table and keep talking |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2006 : 00:13:00
|
Kondorong,
Expect your long reply from me by the weekend. may i ask you what u think nadd is ? I can see many people confused regarding some issues.Most of the times, i used "union" when refering to Nadd. This makes all parties equal, also means all parties together. One can clearly see your one cell support. |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2006 : 00:20:46
|
I will see you in a week. I have some commitments. I think its time to turn the heat on NADD. They have for a while enjoyed a lot of praise singing. Also expect my long response to your long posting over the weekend.
SO DAWUT DUMA DAW. NDUTI NDUTI WA RAAYE |
Edited by - kondorong on 05 Aug 2006 02:08:55 |
|
|
|
Solution
29 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2006 : 09:05:24
|
I think Halifa's points are very clear and to the point. We are directing efforts for advancement. Despite the fact that we need changes, a practical and comprehensive plan on how NADD would handle the transitional period incase the AFPRC loose to NADD must not be compomised.
Doing so could result to a government worst than the current one. I just can't understand why Darboe can't embrace such a genuine and consructive proposal. Placing anbody in the presidency in the absence of well written principles would represent a huge mistake.
We have witnessed a similar problem in Kenya. What these politicians say as they seek the presidency rarely match their actions as they become president.
As pointed out by Halifa, is this NRP/UDP alliance legite? It seems to me that they are putting together a new party. May be am wrong. Can some one shed lights please.
Just an opinion.
|
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2006 : 23:07:39
|
Once again Halifa has exhibited his arrogance by completely ruling out party led Allaince even though it is crystal clear to everyone that the NADD formula is unworkable. His claim that a propose UDP/NRP/NADD Allaince would be illegal is not only wrong but absolutely silly. There is no clause or provision in the constitution that prohibits the existance of Alliances. what is barred is individual membership of two or more parties.
The reason why NADD Allaince ran into trouble with the law last time was because it registered with the IEC under an electoral law that was only applicable to political parties. That is why the Supreme Court had to construe their registration as amounting to registering a political party,hence, the reason for the expulsion of NADD'S MPs from Parliament. Alhagi Ousainu was not implying in his letter, a return to that senario. All what he was saying was lets come together in a party led Allaince and fight aprc. That was what happen in 2001 and they never ran into trouble with the law. The man does not only speak as a politician but also a Barrister. He knows the law like his own name. Infact he is undoubtedly one of the best lawyers in the gambia. This is something even APRCwould not hestitate to acknowledge. SO let Halifa stop fooling himself. Alhagi Ousainu is not his match when it comes to Law.
The udp/nrp have provided a mechanism that will successfully give rise to a credible constitutional reform.They pledge a constitution review commission whose mandate among others would be to hold consultation with gambians so as to determine what sort of constitution gambians [not udp or nrp nadd] wants. They would then present that to our representatives in parlaiment who would scrutunise and ratify it. It would then be sent back to the people for approval in a referandum. What more can be ask for? Forget about the one term limit NADD is insisting on because that is simply not a democratic norm. If you ask most Gambians, they would say we want a two term limit, and that is what UDP/NRP subcribe to because it is not only a democratic norm but also congenial to the wishes and aspirations of most Gambians.
The idea that UDP could be put under pressure so that it can return to NADD as stratigised by OJ, is ludicrious. It will never happen. they do not want to subcribe to a supra-party or what Halifa would call an umbrella party. They want an allaince and that is what gambians called for. The Gambia is greater than NADD. The problem our nation is faced today is the presidency of Yaya jAMMEH. The biggest political threat to Jammeh's rule is the one pose by UDP. That is a fact.What we need to do collectively is to re-enforce that threat by creating a UDP led party allaince with the pruvidential Alhagi Ousainu Darboe as flagbearer, get rid of Jammeh and then collectively we can decide how we want to be governed. Why would this not be acceptable to NADD. HALIFA can have his opinion but am sorry udp/nrp do not buy his opinions.That is so serious about that is the UDP/NRP represent over two- third of those who want Jammeh out, and that is why NADD and halifa must listen. If they are not up for a compromise, then the rest of can engage the people by explaining to them the issues at stake. Time is not on our side.
Never underestimate the determination of a quite man -per Ian Ducan Smith MP [Former leader of her majesty's opposition-UK]
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 01:36:12
|
Here you surface again Nyarikangbanna AKA SS Daffeh. You can run but cannot hide.
Once again you are missing the points. What in UPD's proposal gurantees that when UPD/Darboe is elected they cannot change their minds, influence the recommendations of a constitutional review committee and institute what they want? Did we not witnessed what happened to the last constitutional review committee recommendations after Jammeh took office? Why is it that UDP/NRP is NOT committing to these very ideas before they get to power?
What you fail to point out is that when the UDP/NRP/NADD wins the elections under UDP lead alliance, they are likely to take the majority of the house of representatives simply because the president's party is more likely to dominate the house. Then and only then can we find out that the house can change anything to suit their leaders agenda just like what is happening under Jammeh.
Gambians don't want a blanket amnesty to power. We know for sure many politicians say one thing and do another. Gambians don't only want a REGIME CHANGE, We want a SYSTEM CHANGE.
The one term NADD is talking about and clearly spelled out in the MOU for you to read is that it is a FIVE YEAR transition period to put in place the institutions of democracy and equal representation in all angles. NADD is not for one term limit - That is a fact and you know it.
Gambians cannot trust any political party that is so much yearning for power will abandon its line of reasoning and correct the system when they are in power. We want commitment now before we give you the pass. That is the only we can hold our elected officials accountable. It is the norm in UK, the U.S and other countries. Why is it have to be different for Gambians?
No matter how the UDP/NRP twist and turn the negotiation table, Gambians cannot trust them alone. In fact most of the proposals they have are taking us back to square one - where they were with NADD. We have heard all kind of excuses.. They made a mistake, they don't trust others, they are the majority party, and now they want blanket pass to power? It ain't happening.
NADD supporters, the pressure must continue. Our fight is a long term fight and we must not yield to any ideology that will bring us back to the status quo of dictatorship. The presure has shifted on to them and they must clearly rethink their stand.
Ms. Nyarikangbanna, you have a personal grudge against Halifa. You are envious of him and have attempted several times to redicule him without success. Did you hear him say over and over that he is willing to step aside and let someone else rule? Have we ever heard Darboe say one day that he is willing to step aside not even to Hamat Bah? Call a spade a spade. Those who want easy pass to power are undemocratic and cannot be trusted to lead a nation.
The fight for democracy, rule of law, equal representation is not an easy path. It is a process that we must follow. If you don't trust the process then you cannot trust the end results. UPD/NRP don't want to put in the hard work to genuine democracy yet they want to be trusted after they get there. Hell NO. Let them retire, after the elections, we in NADD are keeping on the pressure for a lasting change. Those who fears failure shall never succeed...
Peace...
|
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 04:58:14
|
| Have some people lost the ability to reason in the UDP/NRP alliance camp or have they simply lost their marbles. Are you people serious about anything at all? While right minded people are simply asking the UDP/NRP alliance to come up with not only a sincerely balanced but also a mature and comprehensive proposal for unity of opposition parties, all they could present is a six-points proposal of about a hundred and twenty-four words(yep you've heard me right, 124 words) to formally bind together an alliance of five or more parties. There must be a severe erosion of the mental faculty in the UDP/NRP think-tank otherwise there is simply no words to describe their ability to reason. Show me any organisation in the world that is bound by a six-point agreement of a hundred words or so and i will show you the toilet. Yes, that is exactly where the UDP/NRP alliance's proposal belong, the toilet. Let me begin by analysing this childish six points. 1)The UDP/NRP alliance be expanded to include NADD-This is to say that NADD should simply pack up and join UDP/NRP, on UDP/NRP's term and dictates. Well the fact remains that the UDP/NRP have no memorandum of understanding or any manifesto, therefore is yet to spell out to the people about their aims, agenda, programmes or what it want to do for Gambia and gambians if elected to power. Why should any sane individual or group join such an alliance. It is never too safe to put your money where your mouth is. Besides, if the UDP/NRP agenda is to create more cashew, mango or orange plantations(in the words of Ousainou Darboe)or to buy more hoes, "kajandakus", pick-axes and "daba kurtos"(as per Hamat Bah) as a way of uplifting our farmers' plight, then i think i may have to consider embracing the APRC. To put it politely, forget it!!. So will the UDP/NRP therefore spell out their agenda now?(like we don't know already). 2)That the new alliance adopt a single flag bearer to contest the 2006 presidential election.-Can somebody help me out!! Is this seriously a proposal!! Is there a possibility of two or more flagbearer in any given party or alliance? 3)That the whole activities of the elections be governed by the present constitution.- Am i the only one who can smell the chameleon in this one. The very constitution that permit the president to dissolve parliament at his own will. Can anybody see where these snakes are trying to lead us. Another dictatorship in the making. Why do we wan't to jump from the frying pan to the fire. 4)The issue of allocating responsibilities and portfolios be shelved and the alliance concentratrate on the principle of regime change which will ultimately lead to system change.-In a nutshell let us not fight now but we can start fighting as soon as Jammeh is gone. What a bunch of plums!!!. I can see why they are rejecting the memorandum of understanding they have all agreed upon as NADD. They believe that after Jammeh is gone, all muscles and clout belong to them, NADD will have to feed off the crumbs from their table. We'd rather have the fight before you are elected than anarchy after you are elected. This is exactly what the NADD memorandum of understanding seek to prevent. 5)That after the elections and provided that the expanded alliance wins the elections, arrangements be made for organising a national constitutional review within a period of three months after the national assembly election.- You could never find an arrangement better than the NADD memeorandum of understanding. Go back to it and tell us what you don't like(or should i say understand) about it, even though you originally rubber stamped it without a gun to your head. I just can't go on with this is bull**** anymore. Like i said before it belong to the toilet. |
|
|
|
jambo
3300 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 19:11:08
|
Shaka,  it belongs in the toilet  do speak you mind. Bit as i have mentioned I have lost the plot with the Gambian elections. The opposition is a comedy act. |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 19:44:18
|
Demba & Shaka,
Thanks for those wonderful postings. This is coming to a point of equilibrum, where even the genuine are not thinking right.
As for Daffeh, he thinks pointing at Halifa Blatantly is fun, but he be reminded that this is a man who uplifted the consciousness of the Gambian people. It seems as though, he cannot iron the beef he shares with Halifa, which i am sure might be older than the present pridicament. No one is saying that Halifa is a worshipping idol, and he is immuned to being criticised, but just attacking the man because of some hidden motives, anger, jealousy etc.. is just not going to be digested easily by decent minds. Atleast, these present attacks directed at him, because of the letter to UDP?NRP doesn't hold.
Gambians should hail the communication started, because i see it as a step in the right direction.The many calls by Nadd on the other alliance to come with a clear agenda, and define it well. So how come some people are getting so low in their thinking ? It is either one is at a stage of "deaf, dumb, and blind", the kind of description in suratul al-baqarah given those surrounded with sin that they can neither hear, see, nor think, or it is demonstration of open hatred against the guy.
In the UDP/NRP letter above, they are saying they extended their fronteirs to include Nadd. What kind of a tomfoolery act or deed is that ? Indeed, a cheap one.As if you already took a decision and you finalized it without consulting the other party. What is the essense of writing a letter then.
The current regime's constistution, that has been altered barbarically, is the one that UDP/NRP wants Gambians to adopt. Even though, it is clear to any decent mind that we are fighting for a system change, and not only a regime change. The same constitution with repressive and oppressing clauses. This part is indeed worrying, and far from expected from some one aspiring to be the president of a nation.
Lazily enough, the UDP/NRP letter is such that they cannot even say something about the flagbearer selection. With Hamat's own words,he have no other choice but Darboe. This is indeed terror. It is not mentioning any term limit, itdid not mention equality of all constistuent parties forming the alliance.
The inconsistencies seen so far, if to go by, i will go ahead and discredit the UDP/NRP alliance for having confused Gambians, and the very betrayals behind the present pridicament.
But like my brother Demba noted above, those that fear failure will never succeed. So if the UDP/NRP alliance is interested in mutual dealing, we will see soon their respond to that of Nadd's request duely. If they decide to ignore the plight of Gambians, then the struggle continues for those that see a true alliance-Nadd, built on solid structures, with a clear MOU, will no doubt one day rescue Gambians. Each and every one will pay the prize for betraying Gambians.
For those that sidelined Nadd all along, which we all see as a union of all the political parties, please don't loose your grips. This is another moment in history to make you stronger, and help to clearly show that you are on the right track. |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 20:32:47
|
Saka, thanks for your posting. The issue is not about who have the best idea. The point is Nadd and UDP/NRP will always have their differences but we don't want that to render the common desire to remove Jammeh obsolete. That is why UDP/NRP decided that the ball should be put in the court of the people. In order words, the people themselves should determine how they want to be governed and all the players should abide by that dictate. Halifa and Ousainu are just two Gambians. They can keep their opinions to themselves and let the people decides their own fate. That is why a constitutional reform regime through which everyone can have an input is suggested. The bye-product of that process would be the supreme law from which all government agencies and officials would derive their powers. If the opposition can convince the people to give them a mandate through this way, surely we can be assured that if they abuse that mandate, the people will kick them out and bring in other capable Gambians. That is where people’s accountability comes into play. Am sure you will not say Gambians are not capable of doing this.
If you look at the bottom of the letter Alhagi Ousainu sent to Nadd, it extended an invitation to them to engage in talks. So, clearly the 124 words[I wonder if you got that right] you talked about are mere skeletal foundation to a fruitful discussion. They are not intended to be comprehensive because that would amount to imposition. That is why even Halifa does not appear to fully understand where Darboe is coming from. What he should have done was to accept the invitation for talks. By this way, they can debate the issues comprehensively and perhaps reach an agreement but no. He chose arrogance to rebuke them.
UDP is the biggest threat to APRC. That is a fact. What we now need to do is to re-enforce that threat in order to oust Jammeh. This vilification culture will not take us anywhere.
Can I also say that you are wrong to state that UDP do not have a manifesto? Manifesto is a requirement under the electoral law which every party has to meet before they are allowed to operate. I do not have a copy but I know it exists somewhere and it is your job to find out. I guess the reason why we are not hearing anything about manifestos is because everyone is occupied with the task of putting up a united opposition against Jammeh. Even Nadd do not speak in terms of a manifesto. All what we hear is MOU which is simply akin to UDP or NRP speaking in terms of their respective party constitutions.
Demba Baldehbanna, I know you are obsessed with my person. Nevertheless, I hope this message is a fitting response to your earlier posting. Otherwise, please chronicle the issues you want me to address and I shall be your servant.
Time is not on our side. Let's do this job and get done with Jammeh.
Thank you lot for your thoughts.
‘Never underestimate the determination of a quite man’ -per Ian Duncan Smith MP [Former leader of her majesty's opposition-UK]
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Jangjang
Austria
62 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 21:58:33
|
In response to Kondorong, Jammeh played with our lives with false pretence, saying "No one will stay in power for more than 10 years even 10 years is too much" and then he changed the whole constitution so as to stay in power forever. Now we have an opposition party who wants to replace jammeh with no program at all but wants to continue the same constitution to suit them. All thay talk about is sharing cakes and power. NADD has given us a comprehensive program on how to select a flag bearer, on how to change the system not just regime change, Term limit after winning, interim period to rectify this rotten contitution with the mandate of the Gambian people, a fair playing field for all parties to make a fresh start.Now can UDP/NRP give us answers to these questions and stop playing with our lives. They are loosing the confidence of Gambians fast.First they broke away from NADD with flimsy reasons and now they want NADD to join them with "Take my word for it".
|
|
|
|
sankalanka
270 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2006 : 23:05:14
|
When you are put in a position of leadership, especially one that seek to carve the destiny of a nation, you are intellectually obligated to create the framework that will help to build the institutions and structures that will rehabilatate the country. Therefore, the process of rehabilitating the country should be a deliberate and conscious process; a process guided by the most objective basis that will bring peace and stability to the country.
This is the reason why such a process should not be left to chance. The Gambian opposition, and by extension even the Aprc party, is not a monolithic group. It is comprised of individuals who are driven by passion, some by motivation and others by insight. The stake that some have in an opposition coalition, may be quite different from the most objective basis of bringing the opposition together. We can be so incline in our subjectivity, and will try to rationalize our lack of support for any genuine enterprise, if lt doesn't support our bias imperatives.
Politics is all about interest. It is relative to assume, that a political party that supposedly has the largest following in the country, or its political leader for that matter, can be the salvation for the Gambian people. What will be a salvation for the Gambian people, in my opinion, is to create a framework that will build the institutions and structures that will promote their welfare and well being; to foster the growth of a sustainable development development paradigm, and permeate a democractic culture that is attuned to the needs and aspirations of the Gambian people. This in essence is what the Nadd project entails.
The interest that is inherent in politics is relative. It is individual, and it is also communal. Our individual interest are exclusive to us, our families and friends, our ethnic groups and cultures; whereas our common interest are the norms and values that hold us together as a nation, and as a diverse people with one shared destiny. We occupy the same geographical space irrespective of all the differences that shape our outlook and guide our actions. These two kinds of interest govern our attitude to the issues of tribe, politics and the national agenda. And it is these two types of interest that govern the political discourse presently.
Sankalanka
NB: If our desire is for a regime and systems change, it is not safe to assume the mantle of power first without spelling out what it is we want to change in the current constitution, or the terms and conditions under which the country should be governed in a different constitution.
If one has to wait until one assumes power, and then summon a constitutional review commision to draft the manner in which the country should be governed, that is akin to putting the cart before the horse. We are conversant with the politics and ramification of constitutions that oriented to favor one group against another group or groups; or constitutions that consolidate power in the hands of a presidency or a political group. So it defeats the whole purpose of a leader or leadeship that cannot spellout to the people how it is going to govern them and on what terms and basis, only to rely on the people who have their own interest to protect to tell them how.
I have no doubt in my mind, that the majority of Gambians favor term limits for the presidency. It creates the basis for a peaceful transfer of power; creates a stable political environment for sustainable economic development, and makes democracy more vibrant and action-oriented. People can live under the comfort that their governments can come and go. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
