 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11712 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Apr 2010 : 18:05:10
|
Growing Protest against Femi’s Imprisonment Reaches Parliament
By Saikou Jammeh
Rising protests against the imprisonment of Femi Peters, UDP campaign manager have reached the National Assembly.
Last week during the adjournment debate, opposition members expressed outrage at the imprisonment of their colleague, who is serving a one-year jail term for organising a political rally.
"Madam Speaker, Femi Peters is not a criminal" the minority leader told the House. "He has been working politically in this country for so many years, and sending him to prison is a matter of concern."
Hon. Momodou LK Sanneh blamed Femi Peters' imprisonment on the former IGP, Essa Badjie who refused to grant his party a permit to hold a political rally.
Another opposition parliamentarian Hon. Babanding K.K. Daffeh of Kiang Central constituency reminded the House that The Gambia’s constitution guarantees political pluralism.
"The IGP's denial of my party a permit to hold a political rally "is unconstitutional and unacceptable." "It does not hold any water," Hon. Daffeh cried out. .
He charged: "I wonder what threat to state security must have warranted the denial of the permit, as asserted by the Interior Minister," who said UDP was denied permit for security reasons.
The sentencing of the UDP campaign manager to a one year imprisonment and a fine ofD10, 000 for organising a political rally has attracted much condemnation both in and outside the country.
The UDP recently organised a press briefing complaining not only about the hash penalty, but branded the trial as unfair and vowed to challenge the court’s decision at a higher level.
American and British governments and the European Union have all issued press releases to the effect.
In another development, Gambians abroad have also stormed the Nigerian and Gambian High Commissions in London, demonstrating against Femi’s imprisonment.
Source: Dailynews
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
Moe
USA
2326 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2010 : 23:04:11
|
Ruffle your feather's guys,It's time for mature discussions that is if that's what ya'll all about. Now that Femi Peter's has been finally convicted for breaking an ordinance/law which he proceeded with a political meeting/rally without a permit, brings to question the motivation behind such a move. I can understand the implications of security being an issue but that is not a legitimate reason to deny permits to any political party especially the opposition parties. It's time to be realistic about the whole situation simply because there is not a standard set to determine what party poses a security risk, or what venue poses a risk. it's time I think for Gambian politics to evolve into something manageable.
I find it difficult that people in general would decided to act at their own capacity to determine the unknown in certain instances. It has a tendency to create uncertainties simply because the determining factor and process will not be as transparent as it needs to be. As of recent the corrupt practices of Jesus former IGP is reason enough to justify a dubious and calculating officer, who would stop at nothing to make a name for himself. The biggest mistake I think is sending Femi Peters to Jail simply because, the worst thing the leading opposition members deserve is a strict warning in matters related to political events.
The question to be asked is How many times did the UDP proceed with a meeting prior to Femi being arrested? If Jesus was a competent official ,The first thing he should have done was to issue a statement regarding the failure of political parties holding meetings without permits. In any democratic dispensation anything less would be considered muzzling the opposition and I think thats what the this whole dilemma is about. Note it is not unconstitutional to be required to obtain a permit for any kind of public gathering or political rally due to the security risks it could pose.
The problem with that is that,it is not unconstitutional if it is in favor of the security of the environment or demo-graph as in the case of lack of responsibility and control of supporters in Gambia, it has to be prerequisite. All I am trying to say is in any vibrant democracy dealing with the opposition requires clear and advance warnings of wrong doings prior to engagement especially if the situation proved to not be a security risk after all. It should have taken more than one "failure to secure a permit" to really send Peter's to Jail, I never once tried to insinuate that the law should be blind at times, but dealing with a leading political party requires caution and understanding, not that the UDP has a good reputation anyways but I would assume this episode of history will be a learning lesson for the Leadership.
The problem with this is most of the irrelevant issues could be discussed if politicians in general acted in a professional manner, Whats going on in Gambia is not politics and it seems no one has their bearings right. When a situation arises and the politician's lack vision and foresight it becomes a nightmare in any society, there is a valid reason why the opposition is isolated in Gambia, just listen to them on tour or listen to their interviews, they are all immature,calculating and conniving politicians that I can assure you.
Cheap popularity is not reason enough, for the opposition to use the online blogs specifically aimed for propaganda purposes to further their agenda's meanwhile ignoring all ethical standards in the process of misleading the diaspora. The only problem with "Femi Peter's" case is that I guess the government of the day should show enough evidence to prove that the leading opposition has been given a chance to remedy the situation on several occasions which they refused. For the sake of Democracy, I feel the ruling party is obligated to do so.
Call it giving the opposition a bone once in a while. For those of you who think the law is unconstitutional think again. This has nothing to do with whether the law is constitutional or not. Femi can try to go that route but it will fail and appealing the case is not the solution to the problem. If he decides to say the law is unconstitutional he has to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that it violates his human rights, which the arguement though stronger "Security risk posed" could be reason enough for the argument to pass judgement. He quite well will not succeed.
Pa Nderry In your Last Interview with Darboe he told you that he cannot file a suit in the high court for peter's because he has no vested interest, true but if hired by peters and he is representing his interest he will be able to proceed,Peter's is the only one that can file a suit regarding the unconstitutionality of the law. What you have to understand is that they were caught with their pants down whether Jesus instigated it or played a role in their continuous denial of permits due to security reasons is yet to be determined. But whether they broke a law is not even questionable or Is it? I personally just don't feel that a denial should be based on flimsy excuses such a security reasons(unknown security reasons) .It has to be based on something valid and every time they are denied a permit I think we have GRTS that could broadcast it, The security services can give reasons why the applications was denied just for the sake of impartiality. The strike at the Nigerian Embassy orchestrated by the UDP militants in the UK was the worst and most misdirected of all the crazy things they do. Lets go through briefly what the role of a JUDGE is and how misdirected, lack of basis and foundation the event was.
A judge interpretes the Law to determine if the said Law has been Broken. I know most of you are carried by hatred and anger and barely know where to start from but lets just assume once again.The Nigerian so called Judges never enacted the LAWS in the first place. These are laws that came out of your own National Assemblies and already existing. The role of a judge is to determine if the Law has been broken or not, whether it is fair rude abusive insulting is non of his business Right! Referring to the Peters case, given the scenario that The law stated that NO Gambian is to hold a meeting without a permit, The question the judge has to answer to is very simple "DID Peters hold a meeting without a Permit?" If the answer is yes, it comes down to what the minimum or maximum punishment is, Right!! This was not a case of whether it was constitutional or not. Its a matter of whether he was guilty or not guilty my friends. It ain't about if the judge should sit in his chambers and think about whether the law is constitutional or not and if 1+1=2 assuming he would be saying to himself, but in this case we have to minus 2 because the law is unfair. That is not the role of the so called Nigerian mercenary Judges and if defaming them makes ya'll feel better about your selves go right ahead my friends. Femi is the one with vested interest whether something is constitutional or not regarding holding public meetings without a permit, he should pursue that prior to showing up in a criminal court charged with a crime. I hope you guys are following what am saying. The strike at the Nigerian Embassy was a waste of time and misdirected hatred. It yielded no answers and am pretty sure they sat in their Embassy laughing at uninformed uneducated fools.
Femi admitted in the first place that he was refused a permit, whatever the underlying circumstances could have been, The fact is he actually proceeded with a meeting and was then subjected to the full extent of the Law. What most of you fail to understand is the fact that The constitution continues to function and serve us fine as far as I am concerned. Any of the changes that it has needed have truly been in the areas of defining citizens rights.
It is our elected officials that failed us and in the spirit of the constitution it is our responsibility to hold our officials to task by kicking the stool out from under their Dabakurto's and send them packing when they fail to deliver. We keep electing the same people or types of people everytime and expect a different outcome, That amazes me,it is not only insane but kinda retarded I think. The problem I would assume mainly lies with the judiciary simply because it lacks the necessary checks and balances to hold them in line and such has been proven with the Legislative branches of government also. I feel that these two branches have done more to side step the constitution than any other entity, But that is just my point of view,rest assured as of present Only Jammeh can be asked to release Femi peters unconditionally.appealing and requiring a constitution review will not suffice and will only create a delay to secure his release................................................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 28 May 2010 08:14:27 |
 |
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
