 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
 Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 19:30:25
|
UDP slams denial of permit to hold political rally
The Point: Published on Monday, September 01, 2014
 UDP leader Ousainou Darboe and members of the party executive Sunday called a press conference to announce that the police denied the country’s leading opposition party a permit to hold a political rally at Cedar Club Latrikunda German.
The rally was to celebrate UDP’s 18th anniversary, following the launching of the opposition party in The Gambia on 23 August 1996.
23 August 1996, said Lawyer Darboe, is “a very significant day in the life of the United Democratic Party; in the life of modern-day Gambia. It is a day on which Gambians who cared for their country got together to put up resistance to impunity; unlawful behavior of the military; to protest against the overthrow of the democratically elected government; and, it was a day when Gambians were given renewed hope that their children and grand children will live in a decent society. The rally was to be held to celebrate and salute those Gambians who have dedicated their lives to the struggle for political pluralism.”
The UDP, lawyer Darboe wants the public to know, is being frustrated in its attempts to hold a political rally, and that it would not allow the opposition party’s political rights to be denied.
Speaking to reporters, Lawyer Darboe said 2016 is a crucial year in the country, a year in which elections will be held. That the UDP, as a political party, has started working towards 2016.
He said the party had planned a rally for the 9th of August, and the application for use of a public address system at the rally was submitted to the police on 19th July 2014. However, the police asked the UDP youth wing leader Ebrima Sandeng to pick up their letter on 7th of August.
The UDP executive then decided that the period between 7 and 9 August was not enough time to publicise and hold the rally, which was to be held at Ebony Junction in Serrekunda Central.
The UDP submitted another application letter dated 11th August “to celebrate the 18th anniversary of the founding of the United Democratic Party” on 23 August 2014 at the same venue.
“Our application was not rejected,” Darboe said, but the police asked that the rally be held at “a different venue.” He added that the police not only responded just a few days before the event; but then stated in their letter – copy of which was made available to reporters at the press conference - that “due to the rainy season and the conditions of the roads linking to the main road, the diversion of the traffic will cause difficulties to motorists and pedestrians, if the rally is held at Ebony, Serrekunda Central.”
When this reason was given by the police, the UDP leader wrote to the Inspector General of Police, according to a letter dated 21st August – a copy of which was made available to the reporters – and complained about the police “handling of our applications for use of Public Address System at our rallies.” He said he pointed out that the police have not been responding in good time to make it possible to organize these rallies.
“In any event, the UDP and other parties have held rallies at this particular venue in past rainy seasons, and the conditions of the roads linking to the main road have not changed. Pedestrians and mororists never experienced any difficulty…”
Lawyer Darboe described the reason given by the police as not acceptable, that it was not a “genuine” explanation, adding that the police showed a lack of “good faith”, when they delivered their reply at around 5 pm on 20th August – to the UDP’s application to hold their rally on 23 August.
He further described the police’s reaction as “a ploy to stop us organizing the rally”, and that the UDP wrote back to them that the party will now hold the rally at Cedar Club Latrikunda German on 30 August.
Then on Thursday 28th August, again at around 5:30 PM, according to the opposition leader, the UDP received a letter from the IGP stating: “Please be informed that your request is not granted due to security reasons.”
The UDP called the reason given by the police “a sham” and wondered what security reasons will require opposition political parties not to hold rallies in the country.
The UDP is not an organ that would jeopardize the country’s security. The opposition party has been at the forefront of ensuring that peace and stability in The Gambia is not put in jeopardy, he went on.
According to lawyer Darboe, if anybody poses a security threat, it has been APRC supporters who have been charged with treason.
Darboe went on to declare that as regards the denial of a permit to hold the rally planned, the UDP holds deputy IGP Ousman Gibba responsible.
Asked how this development reflects on the national count down to the 2016 elections, Darboe said it shows the continuing stifling of the political opposition; that it manifests a poor democratic environment in which political parties are not allowed to operate freely.
He said considering that the opposition parties do not have access to the public media, to deny them permits to hold political rallies is tantamount to an attempt to “undermine the constitution, and to sow seeds of discontent in the country.”
Source: The Point
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2014 : 22:01:20
|
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLITICAL PARTIES AND FREEDOM OF POLITICAL ASSOCIATION
Foroyaa Editorial: Published on September 2, 2014
A state which does not guarantee freedom of expression and association, including political expression and association, is an outlaw state which does not deserve to exist in the 21st Century. Such states cannot be respectable members of the international community. They are always isolated and marginalised.
After the Coup of 1994, Decree number 4 abolished freedom of political expression and association. Hence no room was left for change of government based on the consent of the people. This is why the government was isolated and pressure was put on it to come up with a transition that would restore freedom of political expression and association.
Today, the Gambia has a Constitution which states under Section 25 that “Every person shall have the right to freedom to assemble and freedom of association, which shall include freedom to form and join associations and unions, including political parties and trade unions.”
Police service is a public service and Section 26 calls for every citizen of the Gambia “to have access, on general terms of equality to public service of the Gambia.”
Section 17 imposes on the executive and its agencies like the police as well as the legislature to respect and uphold the fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.
Since political parties have freedom of assembly, the police is given the power of regulation of the use of instrument for the amplification of sound. In that case once one organises a rally one must seek a permit to use a public address system. This enables the political parties and the police to negotiate time and venue to prevent clash of time and venues among the parties and between them and other social groups. There should therefore be no obstacle to the issuing of permits. The efficient and effective issuing of permits makes the police a respecter and upholder of the rights to freedom of assembly and association.
The issue of National security only arises in a state of emergency or when there is a breach of the conditions laid in a permit. Needless to say, all efficient police forces have the ability to monitor and control crowds if they suspect any potential for any breach of public order. We therefore hope that the relation between the police and the political parties would be subjected to review to avoid any friction in the future.
Source: Foroyaa |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
 |
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 20:23:05
|
THE FACTS UDP WANTS REGISTERED BY THE PUBLIC, THE POLICE AND THE GOVERNMENT
Foroyaa: Published on September 3, 2014
As a follow up to the first report by Rohey Jadama, this paper did gain access to all the correspondence between The police and The UDP leader , Lawyer Ousainou Darboe who called the Press at Pipeline on Sunday August 31st 2014 .
The major thrust of the Press Conference is to emphasise that UDP is a registered Political party which gives them the privilege and the right to hold political rallies as the last resort in keeping touch with the electorate in the absence of access to the national media. This is what makes a multi party system functional.
To restrain the exercise of this right by depriving them of a permit to use instruments without which they would not have enough protection to assemble to speak to the electorate on security grounds is as good as proscribing or banning the party as an unlawful society. This is what the UDP leader considered to be unacceptable. Here in lies the outcry of the party.
The encounter between the UDP leadership and the administration of The Gambia Police Force started on 11 August 2014 when the UDP applied for permit to use a PS system at a rally scheduled for 23rd August 2014 at Ebony junction.
According to Lawyer Darboe, the following reply was received :
In response to the reply , the Party leader wrote the following letter to the Inspector General of Police:
United Democratic Party
URGENT
21st August 2014
The Inspector General of Police
Police Headquarters
Ecowas avenue
Banjul, The Gambia
Dear Sir
PERMIT APPLICATION FOR USE OF P.A. SYSTEM DURING RALLY AT EBONY IN SERREKUNDA CENTRAL ON THE 23RD AUGUST 2014
I write on behalfof the United Democratic Party to acknowledge receipt of your letter ref. GPF
CPF/078/8/ (105) dated 20th August 2014 on the above subject in which you recommend a rescheduling of the rally to a different venue.
I wish to make a few observations on the handling of our applications for use of a public address system at our rallies.
I recall that shortly after the conclusion of the Kanilai International roots Festival, the Campaign Manager of the UDP accompanied me to a meeting with you. At this meeting I applauded the good will of the current leadership of the Gambia police force but raised some matters of concern amongst them is the timing of the approval of permits for use of P.A. system. I made it clear that since the GRTS will not announce our scheduled rallies without proof that the party has secured a permit, it is important that our applications are treated timorously so that there is adequate time to carry out the required publicity
Before and after that meeting, we have always submitted application in time to allow you sufficient time and space to do whatever is required in arriving at a decision. I recall on 19th July 2014, an application was submitted for the use of a PA at rally scheduled to take place on 9th August at Ebony in Serrekunda. After several follow ups, your office asked Mr. Sandeng to pick up the permit on Thursday 7th August 2014.
Because we did not have adequate time to carry out publicity-effectively there was only one day-our campaign manager called on you and asked that the permit be not issued as its usefulness is questionable.
On 11th August 2014 we submitted another application for a permit to use a P.A System at a rally to specifically celebrate the 18th anniversary of the founding of the party. We followed up to check on the status of this application virtually on a daily basis until at about 5pm on Wednesday 20th August 2014 when you delivered your letter under reference.
I have taken trouble to recapitulate the above facts to show that the good will that we have banked on is being undermined and eroded. It is my view that the granting of permits must be real and not merely apparent. We submit applications in time so that they can be treated and a response received from you on time. It is my belief that permits granted on the last working day of the week amounts to a refusal because there is just not time to do the necessary.
As pointed out above, your letter under reference was received at about 5pm on 20th August. The reason advanced in support of your recommendation could have been communicated much earlier and this would demonstrate the bona fides of the recommendation.
In any event, the UDP and other parties have held rallies at this particular venue in past rainy seasons and the conditions of the roads linking to the main road have not changed. Pedestrians and motorist never experienced any difficulty and for commercial vehicles it has always been beneficial due to the number of passengers they ferry to the venue.
Even though the UDP does not agree with the reason for your recommendation to re-schedule the rally to another venue, I HEREBY INFORM you that the proposed rally is now scheduled to hold AT THE CEDAR CLUB Latrikunda (opposite Africell) on Saturday 30th August 2014 between the hours 3pm and 10pm. This venue is one that has been used by us on several occasions to hold rallies.
I implore you to this matter timeously so that a situation does not arise to interfere with our arrangements.
A.N.M.OUSAINOU DARBOE
SECRETARY GENERAL AND PARTY LEADER
According to Lawyer Darboe the UDP finally received the following reply from the police administration dated 28 August 2014
“Reference is invited to your letter dated 21st August, 2014 requesting to hold a rally on the 30th August, 2014 from 3:00pm to 10:00pm at Cedar Club Latrikunda(opposite Africell.)
Please be informed that your request is not granted due to security reasons.
Forwarded for your information
Thank you
Sanyang
Commissioner Admin
For IGP
Mr. Darboe questioned whether the securities in the Gambia are incompetent and cannot do their work. He argued that there is no security threat in the Gambia and UDP since inception has always been a stalwart to promote peace and unity in the Gambia.
“I believe Ebony not being a suitable venue is fabricated because UDP and other political parties had organised their rallies there. This is not expected in a country in which democracy is prevalent,” said lawyer Darboe.
Editor’s Note
Foroyaa will contact the Inspector General of Police for his opinion.
Source: Foroyaa |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 20:38:02
|
THE CIVIL SERVICE, THE DISCIPLINE FORCE AND PARTY POLITICS
Foroyaa Editorial: Published on September 3, 2014
All public servants in the civil service or the security apparatus should bear in mind that governments come and go, but the public service and the security apparatus remain. Those in the public service are employed up to retirement age which is now 60. Those in the security apparatus serve their contracts. This is why they are supposed to be neutral by performing their duties without fear or favour, affection or ill will.
Once they do that they would be able to function under any government. In fact, this view is also the view of the Constitution of the Gambia which has given instruction under Section 223 that:
“A public officer shall acquire such professional competence to enable him or her to perform the functions of his or her office with efficiency. He or she shall dispose promptly of the business of his or her office, shall devote adequate time to his or her duties, be punctual in attending work and expeditious in bringing to a conclusion any matter under his or her attention. A public officer shall require his or her staff to observe the same standards.
A public officer shall not, in the course of his or her official functions and without lawful excuse, do or cause to be done any action which is prejudicial to the rights of any other person.
“ In the exercise of his or her duties, a public officer shall avoid nepotism and favouritism.
A public officer shall not encourage others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him or her.
“ A person holding an office in a public service or any disciplined force shall not-
(a) allow his or her political inclinations to interfere with the discharge of his or her official duties;
(c) take part in any activities which cast doubt on his or her capacity to deal impartially with matters or issues which are the concern of his or her public office or which interfere with the performance of his or her public duties.”
If all civil servants and members of the discipline force adhere to this code, no political party would have an axe to grind with any of them.
Source: Foroyaa |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2014 : 20:03:36
|
THE CIVIL SERVICE, THE DISCIPLINE FORCE AND PARTY POLITICS
Foroyaa Editorial: September 3, 2014
All public servants in the civil service or the security apparatus should bear in mind that governments come and go, but the public service and the security apparatus remain. Those in the public service are employed up to retirement age which is now 60. Those in the security apparatus serve their contracts. This is why they are supposed to be neutral by performing their duties without fear or favour, affection or ill will.
Once they do that they would be able to function under any government. In fact, this view is also the view of the Constitution of the Gambia which has given instruction under Section 223 that:
“A public officer shall acquire such professional competence to enable him or her to perform the functions of his or her office with efficiency. He or she shall dispose promptly of the business of his or her office, shall devote adequate time to his or her duties, be punctual in attending work and expeditious in bringing to a conclusion any matter under his or her attention. A public officer shall require his or her staff to observe the same standards.
A public officer shall not, in the course of his or her official functions and without lawful excuse, do or cause to be done any action which is prejudicial to the rights of any other person.
“ In the exercise of his or her duties, a public officer shall avoid nepotism and favouritism.
A public officer shall not encourage others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him or her.
“ A person holding an office in a public service or any disciplined force shall not-
(a) allow his or her political inclinations to interfere with the discharge of his or her official duties;
(c) take part in any activities which cast doubt on his or her capacity to deal impartially with matters or issues which are the concern of his or her public office or which interfere with the performance of his or her public duties.”
If all civil servants and members of the discipline force adhere to this code, no political party would have an axe to grind with any of them. |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2014 : 17:15:47
|
PUBLIC DISAPPROVAL OF DENIAL OF PERMIT ON SECURITY GROUNDS; THE POLICE SHOULD RECONSIDER
Foroyaa Editorial: September 12, 2014
A letter issued to a political Party denying permit on security grounds which frustrated the holding of their rally is still receiving public disapproval as Foroyaa did a vox pop just to know what the public mind is on the subject. Many expressed their disapproval while a few gave the benefit of the doubt to the police indicating that they may have acted in that way to protect the security of the country.
This calls for re-examination of police /political party relation. The question now arises: Should a registered political party be denied a permit on security ground and still remain registered as a party?
That would be extremely strange. In short, Section 60 of the Constitution states that “no association shall be registered or remain registered as a political party if it is formed or organized on an ethnic, sectional, religious or regional basis; its internal organisation does not conform to democratic principles and its purpose is to subvert the constitution or the rule of law.”
Hence if there is any evidence that a political party has subversive aims, it must be produced and tendered so that it would be deregistered. Denial of permit to a party amounts to deregistration. The police have rights to beef up security if they suspect any security threats. Suspicion that leads to denial of rights amounts to arbitrariness in law enforcement and impunity.
Hence the proper thing to do is for the police to treat all registered political parties as lawful entities, map out all the traditional places for holding political rallies in all regions and urban centres and issue permits without any hindrance when such parties indicate their desire to hold meetings in such places unless exceptional circumstances dictate the contrary.
source: Foroyaa Eritotial |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2014 : 10:03:47
|
I find it strange tha Foroyaa chose not to name the UDP in the editorial. Any reason for this Momodou??
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2014 : 10:23:17
|
I have no idea but I believe this editorial is related to this subject. |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2014 : 22:23:29
|
Well UDP is the subject and please tell Sidia to stop saying that the opposition is not denied permits.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2014 : 09:07:00
|
 Don't you realise that it is Sidia and Co. (Foroyaa) who reported and wrote the above editorials? |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2014 : 13:51:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nyarikangbanna
Well UDP is the subject and please tell Sidia to stop saying that the opposition is not denied permits.
Thanks
UDP is a subject already but editorial is also thought provoking on "Should a registered political party be denied a permit on security ground and still remain registered as a party?"; among other issues and concerns.
If first sentence can be rephrase or edited as "A letter issued to 'UDP' (a political Party) denying (them) permit on security grounds which frustrated the holding of their rally is still receiving public disapproval as Foroyaa did a vox pop just to know what the public mind is on the subject." will not change anything on objective, substance and context of Foroyaa's editorial.
Thanks |
Edited by - kobo on 16 Sep 2014 16:26:01 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2014 : 14:34:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Momodou
Don't you realise that it is Sidia and Co. (Foroyaa) who reported and wrote the above editorials?
Yes I do but he told an audience in Sweden that police do not deny permits to the opposition in The Gambia before this editorial. This is not the first time UDP was denied a permit.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2014 : 16:06:38
|
What Sidia said is that a political party need a permit if rally is using a PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM but they (PDOIS) always outmaneuvered authorities by organising community political meetings without PAS. He and Halifa Sallah have covered all regions and remote places nationwide without using PAS. In fact they don't need permits for such strategic political meetings. He said its difficult to get permit organising large rallies with a PAS and no political party is being denied permits to organise political rally but the main issue is normally PAS!
Also he maintained The Police and law enforcement authorities shoud be competent to do their job properly. |
Edited by - kobo on 16 Sep 2014 16:24:42 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2014 : 19:47:58
|
When a member of the public put it to Sidia that the opposition in Gambia are denied permits, he cut him short and said; "that is not true" before he went on to ridicule Hamat Bah for saying that his party was denied permits.
Yes, he did say permit is not required when a PA System was not to be used but this was just to say that political parties can still function without the use of a PA System which, in Sidia's view, is more effective. I do not have to register my disagreement with that.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 16 Sep 2014 22:02:43 |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 25 Sep 2014 : 02:29:16
|
The Police do not have a policy of Denying Permits to Political Parties Says PRO Kujabi
Foroyaa Burning Issue News September 24, 2014 by Ousman Sillah
ASP David Kujabi, Police Public Relation Officer (PRO), in responding to the question whether they have a policy in place that restricts the United Democratic Party (UDP) from obtaining permit to hold rallies, said every political party has the right to stage rallies and to obtain a permit.
The Police PRO told this reporter yesterday, Tuesday, 23 September, that he was even informed that the UDP’s request for a permit to hold a rally on Saturday, 27 September, has been approved.
He disagreed with the position that the police have put a ban on the UDP to hold a rally.
The Constitution has made it a right for a party to hold political meetings/rallies and should apply for permit from the police if they are to use a public address system (P.A System) to amplify voices.
People have been making enquiries from Foroyaa on the position of the police following the publication of the vox pop on the issue of Police denial of permit on security grounds.
SOURCE: Foroyaa |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 25 Sep 2014 : 02:32:43
|
THE BEGINNING OF A NEW ERA FOR POLICE/POLITICAL PARTY
Foroyaa News: Editorial September 24, 2014 by Ousman Sillah
As the Police PRO clears the air, it appears that police political party relationship will now be put on a new footing.
The police and the security forces are expected to be neutral in fulfilling their duty to the nation. Political parties are instruments of leadership. Each is entitled to put its programme before the people to seek their mandate. Hence the police and the security forces should not put any obstacle before any political party to enable them to carry out their normal political activities.
The PRO, when challenged whether they had a standing policy to ban UDP from having a permit to address their supporters, said without equivocation that the police has no power to ban any registered political party from conducting its normal political activities including holding political rallies. Quizzed on whether there are no denials of permits, the PRO indicated that he knows it for a fact that the UDP is issued a permit to hold a rally on 27 September 2014.
We hope that the NGOs like Tango in collaboration with the embassies would sponsor conferences between the police commissioners of all divisions, NIA, IEC and the political parties on the administration of the Public Order Act by the police in terms of holding political sensitisation campaigns, rallies and processions. This should set the country on a new footing in terms of police /political party relations.
SOURCE: Foroyaa |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
UDP slams denial of permit to hold political rally
