 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
 Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 09:46:21
|
Culled from Freedomnewspaper.
EDITORIAL
It appears that the opposition National Alliance For Democracy And Development (NADD), has ceased to operate in the Gambia as a political party. The much talked about NADD, which was designed to liberate Gambians from despotism has been abandoned by its pioneers. It’s about time to deregister the party since there is no serious leadership at this hour to steer the affairs of NADD. Almost, all the key players that constitute NADD have backed out. First, it was the resignation of its Presidential hopeful, in the person of Halifa Sallah. Waa Juwara’s NDAM party has also opted to back out from NADD. Majority of the Peoples Progressive Party the (PPP) have also ceased to be active members of NADD. NADD has been reduced to a ghost party so to speak. It’s not given the necessary attention it deserved. If the current trend continues, NADD might lose its National name. Lawyer Ousinanou Darboe’s argument that it was wrong to register NADD as a political party is indeed passing test of time. Opposition mergers in Africa are purely based on marriage of convenience. Period!! Greed, love for power and lack of principles usually undermined such mergers.
In the case of the Gambia’s NADD, the problem lies on leadership direction and poor coordination. Today, NADD has been faced with sustenance problem. What’s the point of having a merger, when the principal actors are backing out. The idea of an opposition alliance earlier advanced by the UDP, would have saved NADD from the current predicament it found itself today. Agreed, it was wrong for the UDP to prematurely withdraw from NADD, it’s our contention that the opposition needs to revisit its policies to avoid such a situation in the future. Many political pundits are concerned about the implications of the opposition’s PDOIS running the NADD show when “in reality there is no more NADD.“ The parties that constitute NADD had been hibernating for a while now. It’s wrong for the PDOIS to be used as a sacrificial lamb. PDOIS alone cannot run NADD. NADD was formed on the basis of opposition merger and not a single party to constitute it.
We agree with Lamin Waa Juwara’s assertion that the NADD Memorandum of Understanding had expired. Going by the MOU, there is no more NADD. It’s up to Halifa and his colleagues to call their supporters and explain the current state of affairs. It’s misleading to make these supporters to believe that there is NADD when in practical terms, NADD has ceased to operate. Yes, NADD is still in the records of Independent Electoral Commission, but who is the leader of NADD? Has Halifa not resigned as the party’s leader? In the absence of proper leadership settings, the credibility and integrity of such organizations would raise doubts in some quarters. We are not implying in anyway that NADD has credibility problems, but what is evident is that its leaders have demonstrated their lack of seriousness to maintain the party.
We disagree with NDAM’S move to expel its Youth President Pa Manneh. If the party is really serious about its past and present claims of promoting democracy in the Gambia, why taking such an undemocratic move. For Manneh to disagree with Waa’s move to withdraw NDAM from NADD is not a crime. In fact, it’s healthy in any true democracy to agree and disagree. NDAM’S action shows the type of leaders we have in this country. They never practice what they preach. They can call Jammeh names, but would not want an internal scrutiny in their own house. What type of democracy is this? NDAM’S Executive Committee got it all wrong!!! Though, we opposed Mr.Manneh’s unrefined language against his party leader, but the bottom line is that Juwara and his colleagues should have demonstrated tolerance in a situation like this.
Pa Manneh’s expulsion reminds us about UDP’S action to expel Waa Juwara from their party. Waa was accused of the same offence. Today, the kettle is calling the pot black. What an interesting co incidence?? Many are even wondering if these people would not have been worst than Jammeh if they had taken charge of the affairs of this country. The signals we are getting is that there is no leadership tolerance in NDAM. For NDAM to be taken seriously, it must respect dissenting views among its leadership. Pa Manneh is innocent. It was an overreaction on the side of the NDAM leadership to betray their colleague in such an ugly state of affairs. If Waa Juwara can call Lawyer Darboe a “chicken hearted politician”, a thief and get away with it, why not Pa Manneh? Juwara is far from being democratic. He is a dictator of the highest order!!!
Mr.Manneh has taken many risk in the past to defend Waa Juwara. He was charged with “obstructing a police officer” while trying to secure bail for Waa in Banjul. Pa Manneh had spent numerous nights at Waa’s Brikama home just to provide him with security. These were the days when Jammeh’s junglers were after Waa’s head. Yes, Waa is angry, but should reflect on the past and see if he is doing justice to poor Pa Manneh.
Having said that, we call on Gambians to open up to genuine criticism. Dissenting views is healthy in any true democracy. Waa Juwara and co has today demonstrated their dictatorial tendencies. Little, did we Gambians know that there are many dictators in the opposition. Is this the type of Gambia, we want after the fall of Jammeh? Lets play by the democratic game. No to expulsion, because of one’s dissenting views against a system. No to leaders, who transforms political parties as their personal asset. Lets justice guide our actions. We need a Gambia, where people can freely express themselves without having the fear of being expelled, fired, jailed or persecuted. NDAM has set a dangerous precedence for the Gambian opposition. Its leadership should revisit its action in the interest of democracy. We rest our case!!!
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 11:55:11
|
I would like to comment on a few points here.
First is that I do not think NADD was formed to be a permanent coalition . Rather it was intended to be a temporary merger of different parties for a single purpose of dislodging Jammeh in the 2006 elections and APRC and to create a platform for true multi-party democracy and rule of law.Since the 2006 elections are over and NADD fell short of its goals , it is natural for such bodies to degenerate.This however does not mean that they cannot re-group again with a better strategy for the future ; I think that should be their pre-occupation right now.
Second , NADD's break up does not necessarily support Darboe's earlier contention that it was wrong to register NADD as a party.Darboe's refusal to accept NADD is based on his inability to share power with his colleagues in the coalition. He wanted to lead at all cost through a party-led coalition.
Thirdly , I agree with the Freedom Newspaper that NDAM's sacking of Pa Manning is autocratic and wrong. This trend of intolerance of dissent is observed equally in UDP , NDAM and APRC. I strongly believe that considering the current laws of the Gambia any person who become a party leader or president is very likely to be autocratic. This problem is inherent in the political system in the Gambia. It is a systemic problem. Political parties are generally centered around a single leader year after year. This practice by itself is inherently undemocratic ; and it raises the posibility that any president who come to power in this framework will be autocratic.
Thanks. |
 |
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 11:55:11
|
I would like to comment on a few points here.
First is that I do not think NADD was formed to be a permanent coalition . Rather it was intended to be a temporary merger of different parties for a single purpose of dislodging Jammeh in the 2006 elections and APRC and to create a platform for true multi-party democracy and rule of law.Since the 2006 elections are over and NADD fell short of its goals , it is natural for such bodies to degenerate.This however does not mean that they cannot re-group again with a better strategy for the future ; I think that should be their pre-occupation right now.
Second , NADD's break up does not necessarily support Darboe's earlier contention that it was wrong to register NADD as a party.Darboe's refusal to accept NADD is based on his inability to share power with his colleagues in the coalition. He wanted to lead at all cost through a party-led coalition.
Thirdly , I agree with the Freedom Newspaper that NDAM's sacking of Pa Manning is autocratic and wrong. This trend of intolerance of dissent is observed equally in UDP , NDAM and APRC. I strongly believe that considering the current laws of the Gambia any person who become a party leader or president is very likely to be autocratic. This problem is inherent in the political system in the Gambia. It is a systemic problem. Political parties are generally centered around a single leader year after year. This practice by itself is inherently undemocratic ; and it raises the posibility that any president who come to power in this framework will be autocratic.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 13:42:48
|
Nyaring and Kayjatta! Thanks for your comments and would like to commend you that they are very constructive critisms and eye-opener to made some adjustments for further headway in our seeking of resolutions and general consensus to BOOST THE OPPOSITION PARTIES UNDER PARTY POLITICS TO SORT OUT GAMBIAN DEMOCRACY AND RECTIFICATION OF THE SYSTEM FOR JUCTICE, PEACE, PROGRESS AND STABILITY.
We are all aware of the MISTAKES, SHORT-COMINGS, GREED, POWER STRUGGLES, DIS-ORIENTATION ON MOTIVES, OVER-SIGHTS, ILL-FATES AND FAILURES that rests upon all OPPOSITION LEADERSHIPS AND PARTY ORGANS.
Lets move forward and RE-SHAPE NADD OR RE-CREATE ANY FORM OF NATIONAL UNITY FOR RESTORATION OF A PROPER DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW FOR THE GAMBIA AND THE COMMON GOOD THAT NEEDS TO BE DELIVERED.
Later this topic would be highlighted under topic: !Lets be serious with Gambian democracy & politics!
There are very interesting lively Gambian political topics being discussed. The issues are always being varied and twisted over and over again. Lets get down to business and seek RESOLUTIONS AND SOLID PROPOSALS TO CONSOLIDATE OUR STRATEGIES FOR WE NEED TO PUT FORWARD SOLUTION TO OUR POLITCAL SITUATION WITHIN NEXT FEW YEARS AHEAD OF US!!!!
God bless! |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 13:42:48
|
Nyaring and Kayjatta! Thanks for your comments and would like to commend you that they are very constructive critisms and eye-opener to made some adjustments for further headway in our seeking of resolutions and general consensus to BOOST THE OPPOSITION PARTIES UNDER PARTY POLITICS TO SORT OUT GAMBIAN DEMOCRACY AND RECTIFICATION OF THE SYSTEM FOR JUCTICE, PEACE, PROGRESS AND STABILITY.
We are all aware of the MISTAKES, SHORT-COMINGS, GREED, POWER STRUGGLES, DIS-ORIENTATION ON MOTIVES, OVER-SIGHTS, ILL-FATES AND FAILURES that rests upon all OPPOSITION LEADERSHIPS AND PARTY ORGANS.
Lets move forward and RE-SHAPE NADD OR RE-CREATE ANY FORM OF NATIONAL UNITY FOR RESTORATION OF A PROPER DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW FOR THE GAMBIA AND THE COMMON GOOD THAT NEEDS TO BE DELIVERED.
Later this topic would be highlighted under topic: !Lets be serious with Gambian democracy & politics!
There are very interesting lively Gambian political topics being discussed. The issues are always being varied and twisted over and over again. Lets get down to business and seek RESOLUTIONS AND SOLID PROPOSALS TO CONSOLIDATE OUR STRATEGIES FOR WE NEED TO PUT FORWARD SOLUTION TO OUR POLITCAL SITUATION WITHIN NEXT FEW YEARS AHEAD OF US!!!!
God bless! |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 15:42:25
|
Second , NADD's break up does not necessarily support Darboe's earlier contention that it was wrong to register NADD as a party.Darboe's refusal to accept NADD is based on his inability to share power with his colleagues in the coalition. He wanted to lead at all cost through a party-led coalition.
Kayjatta, I think you are wrong in the above assertion. What you should have said is that UDP wants Darboe to lead at all cost and as a matter of right as conferred on them by the Gambian electorates time and time again. That is why when Mr Darboe resigned, the party followed him. He didn't force anybody,and the UDP would have certainly do without him.
I wonder how many times do you guys have to be reminded that the UDP is not short of leaders. Thanks for your comments anyway.
Cheers
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 15:42:25
|
Second , NADD's break up does not necessarily support Darboe's earlier contention that it was wrong to register NADD as a party.Darboe's refusal to accept NADD is based on his inability to share power with his colleagues in the coalition. He wanted to lead at all cost through a party-led coalition.
Kayjatta, I think you are wrong in the above assertion. What you should have said is that UDP wants Darboe to lead at all cost and as a matter of right as conferred on them by the Gambian electorates time and time again. That is why when Mr Darboe resigned, the party followed him. He didn't force anybody,and the UDP would have certainly do without him.
I wonder how many times do you guys have to be reminded that the UDP is not short of leaders. Thanks for your comments anyway.
Cheers
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 16:28:13
|
Darboe is the Alpha and the Omega of UDP. The Party and all its members revolve around Darboe like the earth does the sun. Just like APRC or NDAM there is no contention of power in UDP. Anyone who disagree with Darboe will have to leave the party just like what happened to Waa Juwara after a row with Darboe over the 2001 elections.
In a party that is truly democratic , internal dissent (to some extent) is healthy and kind of strenghtens the party. This is what is lacking in Gambian political parties including UDP. If Darboe or Waa cannot tolerate dissent within their parties they are not likely to tolerate dissent within the government if they become presidents. This is my worry. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 16:28:13
|
Darboe is the Alpha and the Omega of UDP. The Party and all its members revolve around Darboe like the earth does the sun. Just like APRC or NDAM there is no contention of power in UDP. Anyone who disagree with Darboe will have to leave the party just like what happened to Waa Juwara after a row with Darboe over the 2001 elections.
In a party that is truly democratic , internal dissent (to some extent) is healthy and kind of strenghtens the party. This is what is lacking in Gambian political parties including UDP. If Darboe or Waa cannot tolerate dissent within their parties they are not likely to tolerate dissent within the government if they become presidents. This is my worry. |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 20:11:33
|
The Party and all its members revolve around Darboe like the earth does the sun.
Actually that is very important in politics. It is called 'loyalty'. Darboe did not materially induced the UDP in anyway, to earn their loyalty. It is his credentials that has appealed to them. That is why they asked him to come and lead the party. Remember, he was not among the first group who initiated the UDP. He was invited to lead and that is what he is doing with the strong backing of his invitees. The UDP agenda is therefore clearly devoid of sycophancy. It is about LOYALTY! LOYALTY! LOYALTY!
I understand your point of envy anyway.
I rest my case. |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 25 Apr 2007 20:14:41 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 20:11:33
|
The Party and all its members revolve around Darboe like the earth does the sun.
Actually that is very important in politics. It is called 'loyalty'. Darboe did not materially induced the UDP in anyway, to earn their loyalty. It is his credentials that has appealed to them. That is why they asked him to come and lead the party. Remember, he was not among the first group who initiated the UDP. He was invited to lead and that is what he is doing with the strong backing of his invitees. The UDP agenda is therefore clearly devoid of sycophancy. It is about LOYALTY! LOYALTY! LOYALTY!
I understand your point of envy anyway.
I rest my case. |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 25 Apr 2007 20:14:41 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 22:33:26
|
Nyari. , blind or extreme loyalty to a party is destructive to politics. In any situation you must be able to step away and look critically. That is the only way you can contribute meaningfully to the long term success of your party.
But let me ask you two questions:
1)Is there any policy or ideological difference between UDP , NDAM and PPP ?
2)Could you give one criticism of UDP ? |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2007 : 22:33:26
|
Nyari. , blind or extreme loyalty to a party is destructive to politics. In any situation you must be able to step away and look critically. That is the only way you can contribute meaningfully to the long term success of your party.
But let me ask you two questions:
1)Is there any policy or ideological difference between UDP , NDAM and PPP ?
2)Could you give one criticism of UDP ? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
