| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Jan 2008 : 23:40:17
|
Proxy war again and no substance. Typical vexation.
I rest my case.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 14 Jan 2008 23:41:23 |
 |
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jan 2008 : 23:47:51
|
Culled from Senegambianews.com
Gambia's Chief Justice Abdou Karim Savage has rescheduled the eagerly anticipated ruling between UDP/NRP and the Attorney-General and the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) to Wednesday, January 16.
According to our competent Supreme Court sources, Justice Savage this morning called all the parties involved into his Chambers, where he apologized for not having finished writing his ruling as he had earlier expected. He said the workload was more than what he had thought.
"I was surprised to read in one of the 'radio kankan' online papers that Justice Savage has dismissed the case", our source said. "This is contempt of court even in the US. How can a journalist lie in this manner to the public?" he asked.
"However, it's not unlikely that Savage might rule in favor of the state given his close ties with Jammeh's administration, but it's far from truth that he has made a ruling on the matter", he concluded
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 00:09:19
|
Compatriots
We can all gain better when we refocus this much important issue on track. There is a critical bad situation in Gambia. The criminal 22 July coup by a club of bandits is now extending form and essence. The regime will do everything to cover their big crime of breaking the nation's valuable instrument of governance; our commonly agreed constitution.
It is that constitution the criminals have torn apart. What remains of it is a criminalize fake version of text we still call The Constitution. The nation is seriously in need of conscious attention in our collective efforts to fight state organised crime. The way we can all make a difference is by joining good heads and capable hands to correct the damage already done.
It costs more than the passing minutes when good heads and very capable hands of yours stay on bunching without moving the real situation forward.
One lesson we have all come to learn by now is that political parties playing the card game with this criminal regime will hardly gain. It is important to refuse the regime by not recognizing them rather than accepting to share votes with them in an environment that is most unfavourable. The situation that political parties in Gambia are dancing along with the regime is based on organised stage-managed executive crime. In the next number of years this trend is set on forging.
The bottom line is that you can do better by refocusing on solutions. First keep your persons out of the issue and do the same thing with political individuals you bank on promoting. Of course you have a choice and that must be respected.
|
Karamba |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 01:59:38
|
Thanks for resting your case, Nyarikangbanna. I hope your studies of diverty that you mentioned will help you recognize and tolerate diversity of culture, religion, political, and other ideological or philosophical dispensations.
Let us judge one another by the content of character rather than superficial criteria of culture, color,ethnic political, religious and other philosophical persuations.
Thanks again for your time. |
|
|
|
Moe
USA
2326 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 06:07:33
|
| Which is exactly what your attitude and demeanor is all about . How can the kettle call the pot BLACK. Beats me....................peace |
I am Jebel Musa better yet rock of Gibraltar,either or,still a stronghold and a Pillar commanding direction
The GPU wants Me Hunted Down for what I don't know ..... |
Edited by - Moe on 15 Jan 2008 06:08:13 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 06:30:49
|
Moe, for God's sake you keep quiet okay? Nyarikangbanna is educated and quite sophisticated. He just seems to have a 'clinical' resentment against Halifa Sallah and PDOIS/NADD, according to him based on some events during his high school years...
As for you, such an immoral,loud-mouth moron.... |
|
|
|
Moe
USA
2326 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 12:04:58
|
| An immoral ,loud mouth starts with a useless professor who does not apply critical thinking in his trend of thought. A moron is a man who does not know where he belongs or what he is .................Thats u............................Peace |
I am Jebel Musa better yet rock of Gibraltar,either or,still a stronghold and a Pillar commanding direction
The GPU wants Me Hunted Down for what I don't know ..... |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jan 2008 : 13:37:01
|
Yeah, well done, Kayjatta. You have used this as an opportunity to throw insults on somebody's father based on frivolosity and the demeanour of those who would even condone multiple murders in support of their leader as they have done in the April 10 & 11 student masscre. I know what the mandinkas would say about your type of behaviour. 'Ding ding Alfa nenna, ayafolo afaleyla.'
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 15 Jan 2008 14:21:44 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2008 : 00:25:17
|
quote:
[i]'Ding ding Alfa nenna, ayafolo afaleyla.'
Thanks Nyarikangbanna, good quote! However, the only person in this world this quote could be referring to is you!
By the way FYI Darboe is not presented to us as somebody's father and we do not discuss him as such; he is presented to us as a politician and a public figure.
If you are so sensitive about criticisms of Darboe then you need to stay away from criticizing others. 'If you live in a glass house do not throw stones', okay .
I personally have no business with Darboe's use of alcohol, if in deed he does, just like I am not concerned about Halifa and co.'s atheism as you claim. I am more concerned about their competency as leaders.
Therefore, i expect a knowlegeable person like yourself to rise above meritless criticism even of those you disagree with ideologically. If you and the UDP claim to stand for the ideals of the rule of law, how can you turn around and condemn someone for his constitutionally given right (of belief or non-belief in a religion)?
If religious "divine show" (Christopher Malowe's words) is the yardstick in Gambian politics, then I think we should all be supporting Jammeh instead... |
Edited by - kayjatta on 17 Jan 2008 00:28:10 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2008 : 14:04:06
|
Culled from the Point Newspaper
Case Against Local Govt. Act Amendment Dismissed
Thursday 17th January 2008
By Modou Sanyang
The Supreme Court of The Gambia on Wednesday dismissed the suit filed by UDP, NRP and Momodou K. Sanneh as plaintiffs against the Attorney General (AG) and the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC).
The plaintiffs filed the suit at the Supreme Court contesting the recent Local Government Amendment Act 2007 which empowered the President to dissolve or remove elected councilors and also sanctioned the non election of area council chairmen through universal adult suffrage. The Amendment bill was passed by the National Assembly.
In delivering his ruling on the preliminary objection raised by the defendants, the Chief Justice (CJ), Abdou Kareem Savage, stated that on 17th December 2007, the plaintiffs instituted a suit before the Supreme Court on the Local Government Amendment Act 2007. He added that the plaintiffs on the same day filed a motion seeking an injunction of the IEC to prevent the electoral body from holding or conducting the Local Government Elections slated for January 24th 2008.
Chief Justice Savage further pointed out that the defendants filed a preliminary objection on the grounds that the suit was not properly constituted and was incompetent, adding that the defendant also contended that the suit was an abuse of the court process.
Reflecting on the defence’s argument, the Chief Justice said that the defendants in their preliminary objection argued that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter and that it had no original jurisdiction to delay the election.
He noted that the preliminary objection was raised to challenge the suit, countering that it could be raised at any stage of the proceedings. The CJ said that the plaintiff lacked the capacity to institute the suit by reason of the fact that they are members of NADD as stated by the defendants in their argument.
He added that the defendants had not produced any papers to convince the court that they are no longer members of NADD, inferring that the plaintiffs are non-existent and therefore could not institute a suit.
He said the 2005 Supreme Court decision that nobody could belong to two political parties is binding, explaining that the plaintiffs signed the papers as members of NADD. The Chief Justice finally dismissed the case on the supposed grounds that it was incompetent and not properly constituted. The Supreme Court also awarded costs of D20, 000 to the second defendant, IEC, payable to the body by the plaintiffs.
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2008 : 14:10:29
|
The cheif justice said UDP and NRP are non-existent but then asked them to pay D20,000 to the IEC. How on earth can you ask non-existent bodies to pay cost. I am expecting the UDP not only to appeal but also to refuse paying the sum.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2008 : 00:22:45
|
The questions lingering in my mind since this case, are;
1). Is NADD intended for a collusion of parties to form a majority government, which is common in Europe today? Where independent political parties negotiate after indecisive elections to form a collusion-government but retain their independence as individual political parties. Which is different from a merge, which is when political parties dissolve their parties to form one party, which is which?
2). How did/is the IEC a defendant in a constitutional case between the State and citizens. To my understanding, the IEC is not answerable to such a case.
Hope Am wrong, if not the incompetence is a much bigger problematic.
Please help me understand!
|
Clean your house before pointing a finger ... Never be moved by delirious Well-wishers in their ecstasy |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2008 : 10:56:21
|
I think the IEC became involved as a result of UDP/NRP's request for the court to grant an injunction stopping IEC from conducting the election. The rationale for this apparently is the fact that the substance and purpose of the election is damaged by the amendment to the local govt. act of the constitution which is being challenged in court. It appears that one would agree that since the legality of the amendment is pending in court the IEC should restrain from conducting elections until the court's decision is made. But the supreme court disagreed with that position.
What actually confuses me about this case is that the supreme court argues that UDP/NRP are non-existent because they are supposedly NADD. If that is the case, how come the IEC allowed Darboe and Hamat Bah register and contested the presidential and parliamentary elections under UDP/NRP tickets? Isn't the fact that Darboe and Bah participated in the last presidential election under UDP/NRP indicative , atleast circumstantially, of the existence of UDP/NRP? Is the court finally declaring that legally speaking UDP and NRP does not in fact exist?
I think the supreme court should flex more muscle in exercising its power of judicial review. The court needs to consider and protect public policy, therefore government conducts as well as laws (such as the amendment to the local govt. act) that will harm our democratic existence should be reasonably construed as unconstitutional.
|
Edited by - kayjatta on 20 Jan 2008 10:58:12 |
|
|
|
Karamba
United Kingdom
3820 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2008 : 13:44:49
|
Let us get one simple fact delivered home in safety. The legal environment where rules and regulations reside in a country does not exist in Gambia. The coup in July 1994 remains the case of ORIGINAL SIN. It is on the premises of an illegal ground that all these politics is being played. There is NO WAY that a truly legal reasoning will work in Gambia as long as this ORIGINAL SIN is not confessed and pardoned.
You lot hold very sound legal points. Unfortunately the legal environment does not exist for that. |
Karamba |
|
|
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2008 : 16:28:57
|
Karamba
Thanks
You have a point.
My questions are out of mere curiousity. And following events unfolding in Gambia makes me wonder what opposition there is. (trying to understand)
Kay
Thanks
If NADD is a registered independent Party (a merge?) then the question of a majority-government through collusion is questionable hence, there are no parties to form the collusion. This puts the opposition in a dilemma for the simple reason that one cannot be a member of two parties at the same time.
If the UDP/NRP requesting a court ruling to temporarily stop the IEC from conducting the election until the question is resolved makes the IEC a defendant in a constitutional twist against the state then my Question is;
Is the IEC part of the Executive or the Judicial power? |
Clean your house before pointing a finger ... Never be moved by delirious Well-wishers in their ecstasy |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
