 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
 Posted - 06 Jun 2007 : 23:36:39
|
I think under the circumstances its too easy to jump into the band wagon to blame the magistrate. Personally I think the magistrate did a fine job by handing out the minimum possible sentence.
The truth is the law is unjust and immoral and should never made it into the constitution, the magistrate had no choice but to interprete an unjust law. He is not a law maker and therefore has no previledge even if he wish, to change the laws. Its a difficult situation and to be honest he did a good job.
The law states that the prosecution needs to proof the matter was written by the defendant for publication and published wilfully, or negligently or relesslyck. Clearly you do not need a degree in law to know that this is a bad law ....... as burden of proof lies mostly on the defandant not on the prosecution.
I think its a bad law and GPU should continue to fight tooth and nail to get it repeal otherwise, next time a letter 't' is not cross and and 'I' is not dotted, the author will end in court.
<!posting split from http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3761 > by Admin
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11833 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2007 : 23:49:37
|
Somita, you must be referring to this judgement.
Journalist Fatty Fined D50, 000
FOROYAA Newspaper (Serrekunda)
NEWS
6 June 2007
The trial of Lamin M. Fatty, a reporter associated with The Independent has ended. This report contains the judgment and the reaction of Lamin Fatty and other media personnel.
Lamin Fatty was found guilty of false publication and sentenced to a fine of D50, 000 or in default to serve one year in prison by the Kanifing Magistrates Court, yesterday. After Magistrate Buba Jawo delivered his verdict of guilty, Lamin Fatty's counsel Mr. Lamin Camara pointed out to the court that there is an amendment to Act No. 18 of 2004 under which Lamin Fatty was charged. He indicated that the penalty under the new amendment (Act No 3 of 2005) makes provision for a sentence of a minimum fine of D50, 000 and a maximum fine of D250, 000.
Fellow journalists and sympathisers in the crowded court room stared at the trial magistrate, Buba Jawo, while he turned the pages of his law materials as he reviewed the law in order to make a decision. Was he going to impose a minimum fine of D50, 000 or a custodial sentence? When Magistrate Jawo eventually pronounced a fine of D50,000 there were mixed feelings of disappointment that Lamin Fatty has been found guilty but relief that no custodial sentence had been handed down.
Immediately after the court rose, effort was made by the media fraternity coordinated by the Gambia Press Union to ensure that the fine was paid without delay. As Lamin Fatty waited for the money to arrive for the payment of the fine, some 'no nonsense' security officers wasted no time in whisking Mr. Fatty away to Mile 2 to be jailed. Not long after this, the fine was paid and the media fraternity were able to secure the release of their colleague from Mile 2.
Foroyaa sought the opinion of some media personnel.
REACTION OF JOURNALISTS
In his reaction, Lamin Fatty said that nothing can stop him from practising journalism. "I will hold my pen firmly and struggle." He noted that he was only doing his job.
Reacting to the verdict, Madi Ceesay, President of the Gambia Press Union expressed his disappointment at the judgment.
He said that The Gambia is one of the leading backsliders on Press Freedom in Africa.
Ceesay advised journalists to cross-check their sources accurately and objectively inorder to avoid such scenarios.
Swaebou Conateh, editor and publisher of the News and Report Magazine said criminalising speech is setting a bad precedent for the country. Mr. Conateh said Gambia has been deprived of free speech ever since 1943 by the Colonialists by enacting the first Publication Ordinance.
Mr. Conateh added that by mounting public awareness campaigns, the people will realise that freedom of expression is equally crucial for every individual.
Musa Sheriff coordinator of the Network of Human Rights Journalists (NHRJ) described Tuesday, June 5, as a dark day for Gambian journalism.
Mr. Sheriff posited that freedom of expression is quite crucial for democracy.
Mr. Sam Sarr of Foroyaa Newspaper emphasised that the trial has revealed the need to repeal the Criminal Code (Amendment) Act 2004, as it is an obstacle to freedom of expression. He said further that freedom of expression is not a threat to security and stability but one of the ingredients on which democracy strives. He noted that with freedom of expression and transparency, impunity is kept at bay and institutions and society can have a better glimpse of themselves.
Judgment
Judgment was delivered by Magistrate Buba Jawo in a crowded court house. He said that accused is charged with offence of false publication contrary to section 181A of the Criminal Code. He noted that the particulars of the offence are that Lamin Fatty on or between 23 and 27 March 2006 while working for The Independent Newspaper wilfully or negligently or recklessly or having no reason to believe that it is true published false information about an individual. The magistrate summed up the testimony of the first prosecution witness Samba Bah the former Secretary of State for the Interior as follows:
The Independent published in their issue dated March 24 2006 that he was among 23 coup plotters who were arrested when infact he had not been arrested. He went to the offices of The Independent and where he was told by Mr. Makalo that a rejoinder would be published in the issue of 27 March 2006. On that day the rejoinder was published. He expressed his anger about the publication. He said it caused him a lot of anger and frustration. He did not know who made the rejoinder.
Lamin Cham
The magistrate went on to sum up the testimonial of the second prosecution witness Lamin Cham a detective officer attached to the Major Crime Unit. They took the cautionary and voluntary statement of Lamin Fatty after cautioning him on 28 April. The statements were read over to the independent witnesses on 11 May after which both of them signed. Both statements were admitted in evidence.
Malamin Ceesay
The magistrate now moved on the third prosecution witness whose testimony is summed up as follows:
He is a police officer attached to the Major Crime Unit of The Gambia Police Force. Samba Bah's name was indicated in the newspaper in question when in fact he (Samba Bah) had never been arrested. His picture was also included in the article. The investigation revealed that Samba Bah was never arrested. Samba made a statement at the police in which he indicated that the General Manager Madi Ceesay said the story was brought by the accused. At this point, the magistrate noted that this piece of evidence was admitted based on section 19 (b) of the Evidence Act. The magistrate went on to say that after the close of the case of the prosecution the defence made a submission of no case to answer but this was overruled by the court.
Lamin Fatty
At this point, the magistrate proceeded to sum up the testimony of Lamin Fatty as follows:
He had been working with The Independent since 2001. He first appeared in court on 12 June 2006. At the time of his arrest on 10 April he was not told the reason of his arrest. He was detained at the NIA for 63 days from 10 April to 12 June 2006.
He gathered notes as a reporter which he used to submit to the editor. The editor was responsible for all publications. He did not publish The Independent Newspaper of 24 to 26 March 2006. He did report something on the lead story but not all. As a reporter he did not decide on the publication of stories. He read the bottom of the back page of the newspaper in question which revealed that the publisher is The Independent Media Company while the printer is the Eagle Publishing Services. He never published anything on The Independent that Samba Bah was arrested. In his story there was no arrested person mentioned. He did not know the whereabouts of the editor-in-chief, Musa Saidykhan.
Analysis
At this point, the magistrate proceeded to make his deductions and conclusion. He asserted that having thoroughly considered the evidence adduced he came to the conclusion that Lamin Fatty had been found guilty for the offence. He added a person is deemed to have taken action to make an offence and may be charged by aiding or abetting or counselling or procuring another person to commit the offence. He pointed out that such a person can be guilty of the offence and may be tried and be convicted of it. He went on to point out that the evidence shows that Lamin Fatty is a reporter of The Independent and that he prepared a report which is submitted to The Independent for publication.
The magistrate also noted that the prosecution should prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He went on to outline what the prosecution needs to prove in this case, as follows:
1. A publication by the accused
2. A publication that contains a false accusation in material particular
3. Knowledge of the part of the accused at the date of publication that the publication was false
4. That the matter was published wilfully, or negligently or recklessly
In the first place, the magistrate indicated that there is ample evidence to show that Lamin Fatty did publish The Independent newspaper in question. He argued that Lamin Fatty told the court that his name is contained in the newspaper in question and part of the story was reported by him. He went on to point out that the story in the newspaper in question clearly shows that the entire story was published by Lamin Fatty.
Secondly, he asserted that the story is false. He pointed out that Samba Bah told the court that he was never arrested.
Thirdly, he opined that knowledge is the state of mind which must be inferred from the other facts of the case. He went on say that the same is applicable as to whether the publication was done wilfully or negligently or recklessly. He emphasised that these questions of facts can only be inferred from other facts.
At this point, he stated that relying on the evidence adduced, the prosecution has proved the necessary mens reas.
Relying on the citation, he opined that circumstantial evidence is very often the best evidence.
He went on to point out that there is no evidence whatsoever that what Lamin Fatty sent for publication was not what was published apart from his (Lamin Fatty's) denial.
At this juncture, he argued that though the prosecution needs to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, the burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court to believe in its existence. He opined that this evidential body has not been discharged by Lamin Fatty, pointing out that, because he has not seen what he has submitted for publication or given a copy of it. He added that the court has no knowledge of what was submitted
He proceeded to argue that the defence has failed to give evidence that Lamin Fatty took reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of the publication.
He further opined that the fact that a Samba Bah was arrested cannot amount to a reason to believe, because so many people have the same name and surname.
At this point, the magistrate stated that a person who writes a false report and sends it to an editor of a newspaper is liable for such publication. The fact that he sent it to the editor is sufficient evidence the he authorised or intended it to be published. He said further that as a journalist there was a duty cast on him of making a fair and accurate report on matters of public interest and in order to do this it must be incumbent on him to verify facts.
The court finally concluded that having regard to the entire evidence the prosecution has proved its point beyond reasonable doubt. Magistrate Jawo therefore found Lamin Fatty guilty of the offence of false publication and accordingly convicted him.
The offence of false publication attracts a minimum fine of D50, 000 or a maximum fine of D250, 000 or to imprisonment for a minimum term of 1 year. After the plea of mitigation, the court considering that Lamin Fatty is a first offender sentenced him to a fine of D50, 000 or in default to serve one year imprisonment. |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
 |
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11833 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2007 : 23:49:37
|
Somita, you must be referring to this judgement.
Journalist Fatty Fined D50, 000
FOROYAA Newspaper (Serrekunda)
NEWS
6 June 2007
The trial of Lamin M. Fatty, a reporter associated with The Independent has ended. This report contains the judgment and the reaction of Lamin Fatty and other media personnel.
Lamin Fatty was found guilty of false publication and sentenced to a fine of D50, 000 or in default to serve one year in prison by the Kanifing Magistrates Court, yesterday. After Magistrate Buba Jawo delivered his verdict of guilty, Lamin Fatty's counsel Mr. Lamin Camara pointed out to the court that there is an amendment to Act No. 18 of 2004 under which Lamin Fatty was charged. He indicated that the penalty under the new amendment (Act No 3 of 2005) makes provision for a sentence of a minimum fine of D50, 000 and a maximum fine of D250, 000.
Fellow journalists and sympathisers in the crowded court room stared at the trial magistrate, Buba Jawo, while he turned the pages of his law materials as he reviewed the law in order to make a decision. Was he going to impose a minimum fine of D50, 000 or a custodial sentence? When Magistrate Jawo eventually pronounced a fine of D50,000 there were mixed feelings of disappointment that Lamin Fatty has been found guilty but relief that no custodial sentence had been handed down.
Immediately after the court rose, effort was made by the media fraternity coordinated by the Gambia Press Union to ensure that the fine was paid without delay. As Lamin Fatty waited for the money to arrive for the payment of the fine, some 'no nonsense' security officers wasted no time in whisking Mr. Fatty away to Mile 2 to be jailed. Not long after this, the fine was paid and the media fraternity were able to secure the release of their colleague from Mile 2.
Foroyaa sought the opinion of some media personnel.
REACTION OF JOURNALISTS
In his reaction, Lamin Fatty said that nothing can stop him from practising journalism. "I will hold my pen firmly and struggle." He noted that he was only doing his job.
Reacting to the verdict, Madi Ceesay, President of the Gambia Press Union expressed his disappointment at the judgment.
He said that The Gambia is one of the leading backsliders on Press Freedom in Africa.
Ceesay advised journalists to cross-check their sources accurately and objectively inorder to avoid such scenarios.
Swaebou Conateh, editor and publisher of the News and Report Magazine said criminalising speech is setting a bad precedent for the country. Mr. Conateh said Gambia has been deprived of free speech ever since 1943 by the Colonialists by enacting the first Publication Ordinance.
Mr. Conateh added that by mounting public awareness campaigns, the people will realise that freedom of expression is equally crucial for every individual.
Musa Sheriff coordinator of the Network of Human Rights Journalists (NHRJ) described Tuesday, June 5, as a dark day for Gambian journalism.
Mr. Sheriff posited that freedom of expression is quite crucial for democracy.
Mr. Sam Sarr of Foroyaa Newspaper emphasised that the trial has revealed the need to repeal the Criminal Code (Amendment) Act 2004, as it is an obstacle to freedom of expression. He said further that freedom of expression is not a threat to security and stability but one of the ingredients on which democracy strives. He noted that with freedom of expression and transparency, impunity is kept at bay and institutions and society can have a better glimpse of themselves.
Judgment
Judgment was delivered by Magistrate Buba Jawo in a crowded court house. He said that accused is charged with offence of false publication contrary to section 181A of the Criminal Code. He noted that the particulars of the offence are that Lamin Fatty on or between 23 and 27 March 2006 while working for The Independent Newspaper wilfully or negligently or recklessly or having no reason to believe that it is true published false information about an individual. The magistrate summed up the testimony of the first prosecution witness Samba Bah the former Secretary of State for the Interior as follows:
The Independent published in their issue dated March 24 2006 that he was among 23 coup plotters who were arrested when infact he had not been arrested. He went to the offices of The Independent and where he was told by Mr. Makalo that a rejoinder would be published in the issue of 27 March 2006. On that day the rejoinder was published. He expressed his anger about the publication. He said it caused him a lot of anger and frustration. He did not know who made the rejoinder.
Lamin Cham
The magistrate went on to sum up the testimonial of the second prosecution witness Lamin Cham a detective officer attached to the Major Crime Unit. They took the cautionary and voluntary statement of Lamin Fatty after cautioning him on 28 April. The statements were read over to the independent witnesses on 11 May after which both of them signed. Both statements were admitted in evidence.
Malamin Ceesay
The magistrate now moved on the third prosecution witness whose testimony is summed up as follows:
He is a police officer attached to the Major Crime Unit of The Gambia Police Force. Samba Bah's name was indicated in the newspaper in question when in fact he (Samba Bah) had never been arrested. His picture was also included in the article. The investigation revealed that Samba Bah was never arrested. Samba made a statement at the police in which he indicated that the General Manager Madi Ceesay said the story was brought by the accused. At this point, the magistrate noted that this piece of evidence was admitted based on section 19 (b) of the Evidence Act. The magistrate went on to say that after the close of the case of the prosecution the defence made a submission of no case to answer but this was overruled by the court.
Lamin Fatty
At this point, the magistrate proceeded to sum up the testimony of Lamin Fatty as follows:
He had been working with The Independent since 2001. He first appeared in court on 12 June 2006. At the time of his arrest on 10 April he was not told the reason of his arrest. He was detained at the NIA for 63 days from 10 April to 12 June 2006.
He gathered notes as a reporter which he used to submit to the editor. The editor was responsible for all publications. He did not publish The Independent Newspaper of 24 to 26 March 2006. He did report something on the lead story but not all. As a reporter he did not decide on the publication of stories. He read the bottom of the back page of the newspaper in question which revealed that the publisher is The Independent Media Company while the printer is the Eagle Publishing Services. He never published anything on The Independent that Samba Bah was arrested. In his story there was no arrested person mentioned. He did not know the whereabouts of the editor-in-chief, Musa Saidykhan.
Analysis
At this point, the magistrate proceeded to make his deductions and conclusion. He asserted that having thoroughly considered the evidence adduced he came to the conclusion that Lamin Fatty had been found guilty for the offence. He added a person is deemed to have taken action to make an offence and may be charged by aiding or abetting or counselling or procuring another person to commit the offence. He pointed out that such a person can be guilty of the offence and may be tried and be convicted of it. He went on to point out that the evidence shows that Lamin Fatty is a reporter of The Independent and that he prepared a report which is submitted to The Independent for publication.
The magistrate also noted that the prosecution should prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He went on to outline what the prosecution needs to prove in this case, as follows:
1. A publication by the accused
2. A publication that contains a false accusation in material particular
3. Knowledge of the part of the accused at the date of publication that the publication was false
4. That the matter was published wilfully, or negligently or recklessly
In the first place, the magistrate indicated that there is ample evidence to show that Lamin Fatty did publish The Independent newspaper in question. He argued that Lamin Fatty told the court that his name is contained in the newspaper in question and part of the story was reported by him. He went on to point out that the story in the newspaper in question clearly shows that the entire story was published by Lamin Fatty.
Secondly, he asserted that the story is false. He pointed out that Samba Bah told the court that he was never arrested.
Thirdly, he opined that knowledge is the state of mind which must be inferred from the other facts of the case. He went on say that the same is applicable as to whether the publication was done wilfully or negligently or recklessly. He emphasised that these questions of facts can only be inferred from other facts.
At this point, he stated that relying on the evidence adduced, the prosecution has proved the necessary mens reas.
Relying on the citation, he opined that circumstantial evidence is very often the best evidence.
He went on to point out that there is no evidence whatsoever that what Lamin Fatty sent for publication was not what was published apart from his (Lamin Fatty's) denial.
At this juncture, he argued that though the prosecution needs to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, the burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court to believe in its existence. He opined that this evidential body has not been discharged by Lamin Fatty, pointing out that, because he has not seen what he has submitted for publication or given a copy of it. He added that the court has no knowledge of what was submitted
He proceeded to argue that the defence has failed to give evidence that Lamin Fatty took reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of the publication.
He further opined that the fact that a Samba Bah was arrested cannot amount to a reason to believe, because so many people have the same name and surname.
At this point, the magistrate stated that a person who writes a false report and sends it to an editor of a newspaper is liable for such publication. The fact that he sent it to the editor is sufficient evidence the he authorised or intended it to be published. He said further that as a journalist there was a duty cast on him of making a fair and accurate report on matters of public interest and in order to do this it must be incumbent on him to verify facts.
The court finally concluded that having regard to the entire evidence the prosecution has proved its point beyond reasonable doubt. Magistrate Jawo therefore found Lamin Fatty guilty of the offence of false publication and accordingly convicted him.
The offence of false publication attracts a minimum fine of D50, 000 or a maximum fine of D250, 000 or to imprisonment for a minimum term of 1 year. After the plea of mitigation, the court considering that Lamin Fatty is a first offender sentenced him to a fine of D50, 000 or in default to serve one year imprisonment. |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 01:51:41
|
http://www.raleigh.gainako.com/My_Homepage_Files/Page3.html
www.gainako.com
He was being whisked away in that van.
I honestly couldn't stand it at that particular juncture.
at last, he is a free man walking in the streets.
the price for freedom is never cheap, we must never beg for it, it's a demand from the oppressor that will finally let give freedom to the oppressed.
Somita,
nicely argued, but there is a bigger picture to one who allows to be used. if the law is bad, then the individual should rescue himself of it. period. that excuse seems weak, but nice to see your post in another instance.
dalton. |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 01:51:41
|
http://www.raleigh.gainako.com/My_Homepage_Files/Page3.html
www.gainako.com
He was being whisked away in that van.
I honestly couldn't stand it at that particular juncture.
at last, he is a free man walking in the streets.
the price for freedom is never cheap, we must never beg for it, it's a demand from the oppressor that will finally let give freedom to the oppressed.
Somita,
nicely argued, but there is a bigger picture to one who allows to be used. if the law is bad, then the individual should rescue himself of it. period. that excuse seems weak, but nice to see your post in another instance.
dalton. |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 10:04:05
|
Dalton im not sure in this case the magistrate is used or abuse, i think he has perhaps the most difficult job in the world at that hour, trying to make sense of an unjust, immoral and repressive law. In fact i sympathise with him, as history might remember him for all but the wrong reason.
In history most judges/magistrates or lawers have excused themself from case where they believe the law is unjust and immoral. Of course on the flip side one can argue that the magistrate had that choice on his plate but who knows may be not.
Freedom of expression and self determination is basic human right, where it is lacking, it must be demanded from the oppressor with every moral tool in the toolbox, it will never be given as a gift to the oppressed. Unfortunately in our case we are depending too much on the time line, we are hopeful, arent we? but hope a lone is not enough to achieving our basic rights. |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 10:04:05
|
Dalton im not sure in this case the magistrate is used or abuse, i think he has perhaps the most difficult job in the world at that hour, trying to make sense of an unjust, immoral and repressive law. In fact i sympathise with him, as history might remember him for all but the wrong reason.
In history most judges/magistrates or lawers have excused themself from case where they believe the law is unjust and immoral. Of course on the flip side one can argue that the magistrate had that choice on his plate but who knows may be not.
Freedom of expression and self determination is basic human right, where it is lacking, it must be demanded from the oppressor with every moral tool in the toolbox, it will never be given as a gift to the oppressed. Unfortunately in our case we are depending too much on the time line, we are hopeful, arent we? but hope a lone is not enough to achieving our basic rights. |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 17:52:55
|
The case of Lamin Fatty is sad. The big deal coming out of it is that of Jammeh's total illegality. Because the coup that brought Jammeh into such position rests on illegal grounds, it is not likely that a proper environment of true justice will ever prevail in Gambia. Surely, not so long as Jammeh persists on imposing himself as an unmanageable misruler. Jammeh hates laws. What we have in present day Gambia is absolute lawlessness. In the absence of THE LAWS, Jammeh's heavy foot is mounted on everyone's throat. He decides whom to stamp on and whom to favour. |
Karamba |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2007 : 17:52:55
|
The case of Lamin Fatty is sad. The big deal coming out of it is that of Jammeh's total illegality. Because the coup that brought Jammeh into such position rests on illegal grounds, it is not likely that a proper environment of true justice will ever prevail in Gambia. Surely, not so long as Jammeh persists on imposing himself as an unmanageable misruler. Jammeh hates laws. What we have in present day Gambia is absolute lawlessness. In the absence of THE LAWS, Jammeh's heavy foot is mounted on everyone's throat. He decides whom to stamp on and whom to favour. |
Karamba |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jun 2007 : 18:15:08
|
That is pretty facinating argument, i wont say Gambia is Lawless, infact i will not say the courts are not functioning, its the opposite. They are doing their best with the worse laws ever drawn in western Africa. Have we reached tiping point of course not, if we continue on this path a couple years down the line, i can see it developing into some sort of your description but we are yet to be there.
I think sometimes we forget that there are some good forces out there who are doing their best within the system to improve the lives of ordinary Gambians, they are in thier minority and sometimes powerless but this raise is not a sprint, its a marathon and am convince in the end those on the moral high ground will take victory. |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jun 2007 : 18:15:08
|
That is pretty facinating argument, i wont say Gambia is Lawless, infact i will not say the courts are not functioning, its the opposite. They are doing their best with the worse laws ever drawn in western Africa. Have we reached tiping point of course not, if we continue on this path a couple years down the line, i can see it developing into some sort of your description but we are yet to be there.
I think sometimes we forget that there are some good forces out there who are doing their best within the system to improve the lives of ordinary Gambians, they are in thier minority and sometimes powerless but this raise is not a sprint, its a marathon and am convince in the end those on the moral high ground will take victory. |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2007 : 15:48:04
|
| Calling it a state of lawlessness may feel like an exageration. When laws are so bad especially meant to legitimise criminality, they are best seen as NO LAW. Sad as this may seem, Jammeh has gone far enough towards creation of a lawless Gambia. It is him that decides; all based on the so called presidential prerogatives. We have to face it. Those who stay up with the hope of an opportunity to INFLUENCE situations have a long waiting time. The day Jammeh thinks of anyone serious about keeping the laws, you are gone; simple as that. For now, it is jammeh prevailing in Gambia, and NO LAWS. It is all one big joke to imagine Jammeh going by the laws. We are learning from this dangerous misconduct of what we call a president. In the case of Lamin Fatty, where can we lean on the laws? It was Samba Bah who was defamed. What was the state doing about taking Lamin to court and preferring this unreasonable charges levied on him? |
Karamba |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2007 : 15:48:04
|
| Calling it a state of lawlessness may feel like an exageration. When laws are so bad especially meant to legitimise criminality, they are best seen as NO LAW. Sad as this may seem, Jammeh has gone far enough towards creation of a lawless Gambia. It is him that decides; all based on the so called presidential prerogatives. We have to face it. Those who stay up with the hope of an opportunity to INFLUENCE situations have a long waiting time. The day Jammeh thinks of anyone serious about keeping the laws, you are gone; simple as that. For now, it is jammeh prevailing in Gambia, and NO LAWS. It is all one big joke to imagine Jammeh going by the laws. We are learning from this dangerous misconduct of what we call a president. In the case of Lamin Fatty, where can we lean on the laws? It was Samba Bah who was defamed. What was the state doing about taking Lamin to court and preferring this unreasonable charges levied on him? |
Karamba |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2007 : 21:55:03
|
Bad laws dont get better, they get worse in the courts. The academic point am making is that to a magistrate, he has limited choice but to interpret the law as he sees fit. If a law is bad and made to the constitution then its legal at least in theory.
Karamba are you suggesting that we should all quit the country for Jammeh, I strongly belive that non co-operation with evil is as much a moral responsibility as co-operation with good. However I also believe some Gambians within the system are doing their best to help their fellow country men and women.
Personally it was my aim to work for the people after my graduation, to give something back to my people and country but I have decided that I will not work for the regime. On the other hand I respect those that take a different approach, i.e think they can make the difference by working within the system rather than watching from the side. Of course it's moral dialema but I can say neither of them is wrong. The poorly paid doctors, teachers, magistrate, judges, nurses, polices officers, bin collectors, you name them, the list goes on, most of these people are guinene innocent by-standers if there is a such thing. The opposite is more suffering and pain to the poor and humble in our soceity.
|
Edited by - somita on 09 Jun 2007 21:57:08 |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2007 : 21:55:03
|
Bad laws dont get better, they get worse in the courts. The academic point am making is that to a magistrate, he has limited choice but to interpret the law as he sees fit. If a law is bad and made to the constitution then its legal at least in theory.
Karamba are you suggesting that we should all quit the country for Jammeh, I strongly belive that non co-operation with evil is as much a moral responsibility as co-operation with good. However I also believe some Gambians within the system are doing their best to help their fellow country men and women.
Personally it was my aim to work for the people after my graduation, to give something back to my people and country but I have decided that I will not work for the regime. On the other hand I respect those that take a different approach, i.e think they can make the difference by working within the system rather than watching from the side. Of course it's moral dialema but I can say neither of them is wrong. The poorly paid doctors, teachers, magistrate, judges, nurses, polices officers, bin collectors, you name them, the list goes on, most of these people are guinene innocent by-standers if there is a such thing. The opposite is more suffering and pain to the poor and humble in our soceity.
|
Edited by - somita on 09 Jun 2007 21:57:08 |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2007 : 22:37:57
|
Somita,
You are right on the point where it does not have to be total pull out. Perhaps I am being misunderstood for wanting to see a situation of all hands down. That is not my sincere position. I am only concerned about those who sincerely believe they are serving the people (a genuine commitment at that) only for them to face the devil of a man called Chairman Jammeh. Even the most competent persons are being reduced to nothing. We all need to make our contributions in various ways and your option of serving outside the governmental system is quite rational. There is a serious DILEMA. That is the simplest word to put it. It takes real sacrifice to face it at all. What we all can do apart from the sacrifice of WORKING FOR THE PEOPLE is to take the political dialogue on higher grounds. The good deal out of that is to ensure we destroy the environment that permits the players of this brand of politics calling it democracy. Without a proper environment, we are to get set for even worse people than the lot at hand. It appears that some others are squatting to see this lot out so they come to deal us another severe political blow. That can be fatal for us as a nation. We have the double sided task of having to see Jammeh's exit but also fortifying the political entrance and the whole arena against the wrong type. Better we stay with Jammeh if the squatters have something worse. |
Karamba |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
