|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Jun 2010 : 17:54:52
|
PDOIS PRESS RELEASE AFTER THE UDP CONGRESS
By Mamadou Dem 28-06-10
We publish below the full text of the press release of the People’s Democratic Organisation for Independence and Socialism (PDOIS) which was read by its Secretary General, Halifa Sallah, at a press conference held at the People’s Centre on Saturday, 26 June 2010:
The people of the Gambia are facing the most decisive period of our history. They are at a crossroads. The moment of decision is just around the corner. In 2011 they will have the power to determine who will manage the affairs of the country. They have the option to give a fresh mandate to the person in office or elect an alternative leader from the ranks of the opposition. The voter’s card is an instrument for putting, maintaining or removing a representative in office. What the voter thinks should be the concern of those who wish to seek their votes to become public trustees. What the political parties and personalities think should be the concern of every voter. Winning or losing an election could be determined by the vote of a single voter. Hence each vote is significant enough to determine who or who will not be the president of a country or a representative at a particular level. Each voter is as significant as the person who is elected through the combined votes to preside over the affairs of a Nation. The begotten leader cannot be more important than the voter who makes him or her leader. Power therefore belongs to the voters. It is only entrusted to leaders to serve the interest of the people. Once that power is abused trust is broken and the people have the authority to demand for or take back their power and entrust it to any one who could earn their trust. The challenge of political leadership is how to earn the trust and confidence of the voters. This is the challenge that all political parties and leaders must face. They cannot survive without being equal to the challenge. This is why political parties hold congresses and issue Press Releases for people to have the information they need to decide which party and leaders could best serve their interest. 2010 is the year of Congresses and demand by the grassroots for Internal Party Democracy in the Gambia. Two Opposition parties, PDOIS and the UDP have held their Congresses. The rest are expected to hold their own in due course. What the future hold for the electorate is of fundamental importance. This is why PDOIS sees the need to clear some doubts and help the voter know where we are to go from here.
PDOIS aims to reiterate again that it could function as a normal party within a multi party system that seeks the mandate of the people on the basis of its principles, policies, programmes and practices. Few people would disagree that PDOIS has a leadership that has the knowledge and honesty and is capable of making the supreme sacrifice necessary to promote the liberty and prosperity of the Gambian people. PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices.
PDOIS is also conscious that the creation of a genuine multi party system that allows free flow of divergent views on the media will enable PDOIS to participate in battle to win the hearts and minds of the people and contest for votes on the basis of its principles, policies and programmes. PDOIS has always been convinced that if coup makers could concede to a two year time table in order to restore a constitutional and electoral system which promotes self perpetuating rule the opposition forces could also agree to a transition programme to build a genuine multi party system founded on a Genuine Republican Constitution and a free and fair voting system that would give rise to the undiluted choice of the people.
Hence PDOIS favours the creation of a transitional administration after the APRC government that would last for a period of 2 to 5 years.
The PDOIS Congress has mandated the Central Committee to mandate Sidia Jatta, NADD National Assembly Member, to be responsible for inter party relations. All those who wish to discuss relation between political parties should contact Sidia Jatta.
PDOIS is interested in ensuring that the sovereign Gambian people take full charge of their destiny by 2011.
PDOIS is conscious of the fact that during all the nominations for Presidential elections since 1997, no Presidential Candidate has ever had one’s nomination forms signed by more than 20,000 people. This confirms that no party in the Gambia has more than 20,000 card carrying members. This means that most of the 670,336 registered voters are not members of political parties. This is why they shift their political loyalties from one political party to another with relative ease. There are no ideological blocs among the electorate. The country has never had the opportunity to have a citizenry who vote on the basis of the principles, policies, programmes and practices of parties. This is why the country needs a new start that will enable all political parties to have a level ground to contest free and fair elections. At the moment the ground is not level or plain and each opposition party will have an uphill battle to wage to win an elections. This is why PDOIS is of the view that a platform should be created that will enable the Gambian electorate to come together to vote for the change we want and need, in order to build the genuine democratic system, that ensures that their consent will determine their manner of government.
This is why the PDOIS Congress of 24th April 2010 has passed a resolution which imposes on the PDOIS leadership the decision to promote the selection of an opposition Presidential Candidate through a primary. In short, all those who wish to stand against the APRC candidate, be they members of political parties or independent personalities, would accept to face each other at a primary and would mutually vow to support the single candidature of the winner. The winner will also agree to administer a transitional Cabinet for a period of two to five years and build the instruments, institutions and culture of democracy, rights and justice that would culminate in the creation of an open and free society that would allow a genuine multi party system to thrive. The winner will not carry out any witch hunting of members of the past and present administration but would allow the courts to function and grievances be pursued through the courts or alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. All institutions, private or public which are legally established will be protected throughout the transition. Cabinet would be constituted through consultation with all stakeholders. This is what Agenda 2011 is all about.
PDOIS’ Congress called on all parties to hold Congresses and consider what is offered by agenda 2011 so that all parties will utilise their own platform to promote the determination of an opposition Candidate through a primary and prepare themselves for future multiparty contest after the transition.
The Central Committee of PDOIS takes this opportunity to reiterate PDOIS’ stand. It wants its supporters in particular and all those Gambian people who value their sovereignty to know that the only transformation that is possible in 2011 is one that could attract the support of the 405,932 voters who did not vote for President Jammeh in 2006 and the 542,055 voters who did not vote for the opposition. Most of these people are likely to become involved if they know that they are going to be mandated to select a candidate who will accept to serve for one term to put a genuine multiparty system in place and leave office like Nelson Mandela. As far as PDOIS is concerned, this transitional Candidate will not have to be a PDOIS leader. He or she could originate from another party or civil society. He or She could be any body selected by the people through a primary.
Secondly, the PDOIS Congress resolves that PDOIS maintains its relation with NADD until the next Presidential and National Assembly elections. Sidia Jatta has started consultation with our other partner in NADD. They had agreed to wait for the outcome of the UDP Congress to complete their discussion. PDOIS anticipates that its partner in NADD would hold a Congress and embrace Agenda 2011 so that NADD would also embrace Agenda 2011. Notwithstanding the Central Committee has resolved to hold a PDOIS rally in support of Agenda 2011 on the 31st of July 2010 at LatriKunda Yerri Nganya, adjacent to the mosque where PDOIS held its first rally in 1986.
PDOIS’ DISAGREMENT WITH UDP AND NRP
PDOIS wrote to UDP before its Congress to indicate to them that the party was waiting for the resolution of the UDP Congress on inter party unity in order to know what form of Alliance could be forged for 2011.
The UDP leader, in his address to the Congress indicated that the registration of NADD was a disaster. PDOIS would want its supporters in particular and all those interested in Gambian politics in general to know that the registration of NADD was a Constitutional requirement. No candidate could contest under NADD without its registration as a political party. PDOIS advances a challenge to any leader who disagrees with this view. Hence those who did not support the registration of NADD should not have signed the Memorandum of Understanding establishing NADD.
In short, under the strategic objectives of the Memorandum, Parties “agreed to put together resources within the framework of the Alliance to contest the forthcoming Presidential, National Assembly and Council elections.” It adds that “The selection of the candidate of the Alliance for the Presidential, National Assembly and Council elections shall be done by consensus, provided that in the event of an impasse selection shall be done by primary election restricted to party delegates, on the basis of equal number of delegates, comprising the Chairman, Chairwoman and youth leader of each party from each village or ward in a constituency”
In terms of the tenure of office, the memorandum states that “The interim President of the Republic under the Alliance shall serve for one five year term of office only. He/she shall vacate his or her seat at the end of his or her term of office and shall neither seek nor support the candidature of any other person for the ensuing presidential elections.
“A constitutional provision shall be put in place under the Alliance that would limit the number of terms a person could occupy the office of president of the Republic to two.” Hence all parties which signed the Memorandum agreed to put up Candidates under a NADD ticket. This is incontrovertible. Now one may ask: Could a candidate stand on a NADD ticket without NADD being registered as a Party? The answer is in the negative. It is obvious to any one who has read section 60 of the Constitution that we could not put up Candidates under NADD until NADD was registered as a party. It reads “No association, other than a political party registered under or pursuant of an Act of the National Assembly, shall sponsor Candidates in public elections.” NADD had to be registered. Did we have to lose National Assembly seats because of the Registration? The answer is in the Negative.
Section 91 subsection 1(d) of the Constitution states that
“a member of the National Assembly shall vacate his or her seat in the National Assembly - if he or she ceases to be a member of the political party of which he or she was a member at the time of his or her election;
provided that nothing in this paragraph shall apply on a merger of political parties at the national level where such a merger is authorised by the Constitution of the parties concerned.”
The simple and elementary truth is that all parties that had agreed to put up Candidates under NADD had merged into NADD. The IEC also conceived NADD as an Umbrella party, a merger. They argued their case in that regard and even told the court that they had drafted the rules governing Alliances. The disaster is that NADD’s Counsels did not use merger of parties as a defence to save National Assembly seats. The registration of NADD was not an error. The only legal advice that was legitimate was to tell parties that they were creating a merger by signing the Memorandum of Understanding. Hence those who did not want a merger should not have signed it. The error was to fail to get every party to sign to indicate in black and white that they conceived NADD as an umbrella Party or merger or resign from NADD before the court case. No room would have been left for historical excuses that are so evident after NADD’s disintegration.
Secondly, in his address to the UDP Congress the NRP leader claimed that he left NADD because other parties did not believe in his principle of allowing the party with the majority to lead. This claim is incorrect.
The NRP signed a memorandum which indicated that the selection of Candidates would be done through a unanimous vote of executive members or a primary. It goes without saying that during the first attempt to select a candidate in accordance with the principle of unanimity, it is Dullo Bah, the representative of the NRP who nominated a representative of the PPP and Pa Manneh, a representative of NDAM who seconded the nomination of the representative of the PPP. This compelled UDP and PDOIS representatives to make their own nominations and thereby created an impasse. It was the Coordinator who explained that the Executive Committee only had the power to select a candidate if their decision is unanimous; otherwise election would have to take place in the form of a primary to enable the people to select the flag bearer. At no time did the NRP leader denounce Dulo Bah and state a party position for the selection of the flag bearer. In fact when the delegates met to try to make a second attempt to reach unanimity by establishing some criteria to guide the nomination process the NRP leader never advocated for the selection of a majority party leader as a criterion. Throughout the history of NADD, the NRP leader had never proposed for an Amendment of the Memorandum to incorporate what he called his principle. Such attempts to rewrite history only undermines mutual trust between opposition leaders, fan polemics and draws attention away from the ruling party and focuses it on the squabbles among the opposition. PDOIS hopes that leaders would realise that any refusal to accept the facts will push us to propagate fiction which will not lead us to draw appropriate lessons to move forward.
Conclusion
To conclude, PDOIS would want the people to recall that Gambia has been led by 2 Heads of state for the past 45 years. In the next 15 years those who were born in 1965 will be 60 years. It is clear that unless we break the current trend of self perpetuating rule two heads of state will lead the Gambia for 60 years.
As we face another election cycle it is the duty of every sovereign Gambian who is 18 years old and above to reflect on the state of the Gambia after 45 years of Nationhood and ask whether this is the same Gambia, with its growing poverty, redundancies, growth of drug lords and contraction of liberty that should continue to be up to the year 2020 and beyond. It is now time for each Gambian to sit and reflect on the type of Gambia one wants to be a citizen of and the role one is to play in shaping the destiny of one’s country and people. This is the challenge of 2011. Are we up to the challenge? History the keen recorder of events has its eyes and ears open. The future will tell the story. Our children and children’s children will be the judge.
The End
Issued by The Central Committee of PDOIS
Delivered by Halifa Sallah – Spokesperson of PDOIS
Source: Foroyaa Online
Related Topic:
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
Topic Locked
