"Stop Confusing Matters Melville Roberts" Dida Jallow Halake

The IEC followed what they think the law is, as we all must! I don’t know what Mr Melville Roberts Esq. is talking about! The IEC is NOT “interpreting” the law! They are simply following the law as they understand it to be (that is Lawyer Lamin J Dabo’s point!). All of us follow the law in our daily lives ... as we know or think the law to be. If we are wrong, then the court (which “interprets the law”) tells us we are wrong and holds us accountable. So, Mr. Melville Roberts Esq, the IEC decided for themselves what they think the law is ... just as you and I are free to decide for ourselves what we think the law is! They are simply following the law – as they think the law to be. Stop confusing matters by saying that “the IEC is interpreting the law”! No they are NOT! It is the court that interprets the law ... not me, not the IEC and NOT even an eminent Oxford University Lawyer like yourself! Lawyers give an “opinion”, which is NOT an “interpretation” – something that is reserved for the courts! As I argued on WhatsOnGambia three days ago and as Lawyer Lamin J Dabo wrote on GunjurOnLine yesterday, “Sabally does not have a snowball’s chance in hell” of winning in court. The facts are against him:- 1. A Commission of Inquiry has stated that he should be banned from holding public office for life; 2. Section 90 of the Constitution says that he who has abused or misused his office should be banned from being a candidate for the National Assembly. Case closed. End of. The IEC is on solid grounds. PS: Momodou Sabally has declared himself to be “The Gambia’s Julius Malema”, so we might soon see him wearing red overalls in the streets of Banjul ... and leading a revolution, a new 10-Years JOTNA?! Dida Jallow-Halake, Notting Hill, UK.

The Momodou Sabally National Assembly Nomination Saga: Sad but Lawful

● He is a towering intellectual and first rate orator, served simultaneously as Secretary General and Minister of Presidential Affairs under His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhagie Dr Yahya A. J. Jammeh (the Professor). In that role he met all stripes of leaders domestic and international and participated in the great public dramas of the day at the policy councils of the Gambian state. Allowing for the authoritarian vagaries of the system installed by the Professor, Momodou Sabally (Sabally) was for a year the great supervisor of the Public Service, sounding board of the President, his preeminent confidant, and primus among the Ministers. Having presided, or somewhat participated over the hiring and firing of senior government figures, including some cabinet colleagues, he knows a thing or two about policy and its implementation. After all, he is the Gambia’s Pen and vigorously expresses his enlightening and entertaining perspective on the burning public questions of the day. If his great and controversial mind was a source of joy and annoyance to the intellectual community, they were projected on a larger canvass when he joined the United Democratic Party (UDP) and campaigned vigorously for its agenda across the country, thus making himself a household name. No surprise therefore that Sabally’s expression of interest in contesting the Busumbala Constituency for the UDP in the April National Assembly Elections captured public attention. The run-up to nomination day on 10 March was crowded with great excitement as Sabally has all the ingredients of a great parliamentary statesman: intelligent, outspoken, controversial entertaining. He may be among the few candidates capable of generating cross party support at the polls but for the Independent Electoral Commission’s (IEC) decision to reject his application for nomination under the UDP ticket. According to the IEC, Sabally was adversely mentioned in THE REPORT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES OF PUBLIC BODIES, ENTERPRISES AND OFFICES AS REGARDS THEIR DEALINGS WITH FORMER PRESIDENT YAHYA A.J.J. JAMMEH AND CONNECTED MATTERS The Government’s White Paper on the matter as concerns Sabally states at paragraphs: 216:- Mr. Momodou Sabally started at the Central Bank as an Economist from 1999 to 2009. He was Director of Budget at the Ministry of Finance from 2010 to 2013. He was appointed as Acting Secretary General in June 2013, and then subsequently confirmed as Secretary General and Minister for Presidential Affairs in the same year. His service was terminated in June 2014. 217:- The Commission found, inter alia, that during his tenure as Secretary General, Mr Momodou Sabally was signatory to various public accounts and was involved in the withdrawal of large sums of public funds, some of which were not accounted for, on the instructions of former President Jammeh. The Commission found that Mr Momodou Sabally and former President Jammeh are jointly and severally liable for the said amounts of money misappropriated by former President Jammeh. 218. The Government notes that Mr Momodou Sabally’s many involvements in the financial transactions of former President Jammeh, which was not part of his official duties, especially as Secretary General, demonstrate the enthusiasm with which he facilitated these transactions. His conduct fell far short of the standard of professional conduct expected of the Head of the Civil Service at the time. 219. Consequently, the Government accepts the Commission’s recommendation that Mr Momodou Sabally should not serve in any public office again or be appointed as Director for any State Owned Enterprise for at least ten years. Mr Momodou Sabally is hereby banned from holding public office for the remainder of his life. He is also banned from holding any director positions in any State Owned Enterprises in The Gambia for ten (10) years. Both bans are effective from the date of publication of this White Paper. The monies shall be recovered from the assets of former President Jammeh. Clearly, a member of the National Assembly is not a public office holder (see section 166 (4) (a) of the 1997 Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia (the Constitution). Viewed in isolation, this provision would appear to suggest the IEC was wrong in rejecting Sabally’s application for nomination as a candidate in the upcoming National Assembly Elections. However, the IEC specifically rejected Sabally’s application for nomination on the basis of section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution that “no person is qualified for election as a member of the national assembly if he or she has been found by a report of a commission or committee of inquiry (the proceedings of which are have been held and published in accordance with the relevant law) to be incompetent to hold public office by reason of having acquired assets unlawfully or defrauded the state or misused or abused his or her office, or wilfully acted in a manner pre-judicial to the interests of the state, and the findings have not been set aside on appeal or judicial review”. It is common knowledge that Sabally lodged an appeal against the adverse mention, and the bans imposed on him, by the Janneh Commission, and the Government. Until they are “set aside on appeal or judicial review”, section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution continues to operate against him. A convicted prisoner remains a prisoner until his appeal is allowed. On the particular facts of Sabally’s case, his impediment remains pending the hearing and determination of his appeal. As to whether the IEC has the competence to interpret section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution at its level, I merely state it is performing a legally permitted intermediate gate keeping function which can only be conclusively ratified by a competent court where its perspective is contested. However, the Janneh Commission Report and its accompanying White Paper are public documents available to the IEC and it can act upon them where deemed necessary. Albeit on contested understandings, it is far from clear that the IEC operated outside the law when it rejected Sabally’s application for nomination as UDP candidate for Busumbala. With the clarity of section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution, he appears not to have a snowball’s chance in hell in overturning the IEC decision. Of course the cases of the current Chief of Protocol, and the likes of Mamburay Njie, were given lighter treatment by the Government, and these were picked on by observers. What is clear is that they and others similarly situated cannot contest in National Assembly elections under the law. As to the protests that the law is differentially applied, I suggest the facts are distinguishable in that the Sabally saga was triggered by the National Assembly qualification regime. On a lighter note, maybe we should proceed with Mr Bumble when confronted with the postulation that as between him and his wife he was “… the more guilty of the two, in the eye of the law; for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction." Mr Bumble protested that “If the law supposes that, the law is a ass — a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience” I urge Sabally to deploy his immense talents in helping others this election season and to accept that on current facts, he cannot serve as a National Assembly Member until his appeal is allowed. Lamin J. Darbo

Yankuba Touray Dinied Having Contact With Alagie Kanyi

Yankuba Touray on Monday said he did not block late Ousman Koro Ceesay’s vehicle contrary to the testimony of one of the prosecution witnesses, who said he witnessed Touray and Edward Singhatey blocking the late minister’s vehicle. Touray said his vehicle was not at the airport on that day as he was in the vehicle of former President (then Chairman) Yaya Jammeh who was travelling outside the country. “My vehicle was not at the airport,” he said. Touray is facing a single count of murder. He is accused of killing his former colleague Minister Ousman Koro Ceesay, who was responsible for finance under the military rule in June 1995.- Touray denied liability and the prosecution called nine witnesses to testify, after which, the prosecution’s case was closed. The former military captain called in two witnesses and he is the third witness in defence. Below is the verbatim testimony of Mr Touray on Monday, 22nd February 2020 before Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the Banjul High Court. He was led by his lawyer, Abdoulie Sisoho. Question: On that day, were you aware that you lost a colleague cabinet minister? Answer: Yes. Question: How do you get to know about that? Answer: I was informed by the Secretary to Cabinet Mr Tamsir Mbye. Question: Have you ever been with Ensa Mendy to the State House? Answer: Yes. Question: Can you tell the court when you went with him to the State House? Answer: Usually, on Tuesday and Thursday. those were the days we used to have our Council and Cabinet meetings respectively. Question: Can you tell the court the time those meetings were held? Answer: They were held in the morning or afternoon, depending on the schedule of the Chairman [of APRC] and sometimes it ends very late in the evening. It depends on the agenda. Question: If the meeting ends very late in the evening, what usually happens to Mr. Ensa Mendy? Answer: He accompanies me to Kerr Sering. Question: You used to collect your kids from school and take them home. What happens to them on Tuesdays and Thursdays when the meeting ends very late? Answer: The kids were picked up by the driver and driven home at Kerr Sering. Question: In those meetings on Tuesday and Thursday, did Lamin Ndour accompany you? Answer: No, because it was a walking distance from my office to the cabinet. Question: For clarity purpose, your office was at the Quadrangle? Answer: Yes. Question: What happens to Mr. Ndour if these meetings are in sessions? Answer: He stays at the office and picks the kids from school and drives them to Kerr Sering. Question: Lamin Ndour and Ensa Mendy [both] testified before this court that they accompanied you to the State House when Yaya Jammeh was leaving the country on that Friday. Is that true? Answer: No, it is not. Question: Captain Jangum told this court that he was posted at your place [residence] but he cannot remember your guards. As an experienced person, from non-commissioned officer to a commissioned officer, do you take this statement as true? Answer: That is impossible because as a non-commissioned officer all guards under your command should be at your fingertips, particularly, when you serve in the same company with the private soldiers. Question: Do you remember Pa Habib Mbye? Answer: Yes. Question: Mr. Mbye testified that you blocked Mr. Koro Ceesay’s vehicle intentionally at the airport – you and Edward Singhatey. Answer: That is not true because my car was not at the airport. Question: He further said subsequently you invited him to your office. Is that true? Answer: This is slander because the closest encounter I had with Pa Habib, whom I don’t know, was when he came to testify as a prosecution witness in this case before this court. Question: Prior to this case, have you ever have an encounter with Pa Habib Mbye? Answer: No. Question: Have you ever sat with Mr Alagie Kanyi and discussed the killing of a human being? Answer: No. Question: Did you sit with Alagie Kanyi to discuss the killing of Ousman Koro Ceesay? Answer: No. Question: Have you ever been to Alagie Kanyi’s house? Answer: No. Question: Have you ever invited Alagie Kanyi to your house? Answer: No. Question: Have you ever invited Alagie Kanyi to your residence in Cape Point, Kotu or Kololi in your life? Answer: No, I did not have any contact with him since I was at the 1st and 2nd infantry battalions. The closest encounter we had was when he testified as a prosecution witness in this case and [in] another case which I was charged by the State for interference. He made a “rousing lie” against me. The State entered anolle in the case for lack of merit. Question: Have you ever discussed with Edward Singhatey that you killed Ousman Koro Ceesay? Answer: No. Question: Did you discuss with Peter Singhatey that you killed Ousman Koro Ceesay? Answer: No. Question: Did you invite Alagie Kanyi, Edward Singhatey and Peter Singhatey into your house ever? Answer: No. Question: Did you invite Alagie Kanyi, Peter Singhatey and Edward Singhatey into your house to kill Koro Ceesay? Answer: No. Question: Alagie Kanyi said they were briefed in your house between 6 pm and 8 pm. Answer: That is impossible. Question: Can you tell the court why that is impossible? The case was adjourned to Thursday, 25th February 2021 at 1 pm source www.foroyaa.gm

Nigeria: Attacks on schools undermine right to education

Responding to the abduction of 42 persons by gunmen at the Government Science College Kagara Niger state Nigeria, in the early hours of today, Osai Ojigho, Director of Amnesty International Nigeria, said: “We condemn this appalling attack, which is the latest in a string of attacks on schools in northern Nigeria. Attacks on schools and abductions of children are war crimes. Those found to be responsible of the abduction must be brought to justice for these and other human rights abuses. “That this is coming only about three months after a similar incident at a school in Kankara, Katsina state, shows that authorities are not doing enough to protect lives. The children abducted are in serious risk of being harmed. Nigerian authorities must take all measures to return them to safety, along with all children currently under the custody of armed groups.” Education is under attack in northern Nigeria. Schools should be places of safety, and no child should have to choose between their education and their life. Other children have had to abandon their education after being displaced by frequent violent attacks on their communities, and many teachers have been forced to flee to other states. The Nigerian authorities must act immediately to prevent attacks on schools, to protect children’s lives and their right to education. Osai Ojigho “The protection of children’s lives is paramount, and the Nigerian government has a duty to ensure that the country’s educational sector is not further threatened by armed groups on rampage across northern Nigeria.” “The attack on Government Science College Kagara is a serious violation of international humanitarian law, and it undermines the right to education for thousands of children in northern Nigeria. The abduction of students by armed groups can severely reduce the availability of and access to education for many children in northern Nigeria where violent attacks are escalating.” Background In the early hours of 17 February 2021 gunmen abducted 42 persons at Government Science College Kagara Niger state central Nigeria. Authorities confirmed that 27 of those abducted are students, 3 are staff of the college and 13 members of the families of the staff kidnapped. One student was shot dead by the abductors. Amnesty International has been documenting Boko Haram’s atrocities and targeting of schools since 2012: https://bit.ly/3mpHtLI In May 2020, Amnesty International also published a report on the dire impact of the conflict in Northeast Nigeria on children.

Facebook must stop blocking Australian news sites from being shared

Responding to Facebook blocking Australian news sites from being shared on its platform Amnesty International Australia campaigner Tim O’Connor said: "It is extremely concerning that a private company is willing to control access to information that people rely on. Facebook’s action starkly demonstrates why allowing one company to exert such dominant power over our information ecosystem threatens human rights. "It’s alarming that community support groups, emergency services and charities have had their content blocked. "We’re particularly concerned with the effect this is having on people in the Pacific, many of whom rely on getting information and news from Facebook due to the nature of their agreements with telecommunications providers. "Facebook’s willingness to block credible news sources also stands in sharp distinction to the company’s poor track record in addressing the spread of hateful content and disinformation on the platform. "Amnesty International calls on Facebook to immediately reverse this decision."

If You Fit The Name lawyer Prove Corruption Allegations Against Barrow

Dodou Sanno, an adviser to President Barrow, has challenged lawyer and politician Assan Martin “to come out with proofs” over his allegations that the president and his government are mired in corruption. Lawyer Martin told The Standard on February 5th that Gambians should not give President Barrow a fresh mandate when they go to the polls in December because of a litany of failures, top of which is rampant corruption. Reacting to Mr Martin over the weekend at the headquarters of President Barrow’s National People’s Party of which he is an executive member, Mr Sanno countered: “I am challenging Assan Martin as a lawyer to come out with evidence which can show to the Gambians that there is corruption in the government. Let him point his finger to any government department or any person working in the government engaging in corruption. Before he says something, he must have evidence for it. Maybe he himself is part of the corruption he is talking about. “I am not the government spokesperson, but I can say that before anyone accuses the government or anybody, you must have the proof. If there is corruption in the country, every citizen has the right to put a stop to it. But where is the corruption going on this country? I want to ask Assan Martin did he stop anybody from practising corruption in the country? If there is anybody let him bring that person too. “If he wants people to trust him as a lawyer so that he can have more clients, let him stop peddling false statements. Gambians are now fully aware and they know who is a professional lawyer and who is not. If Assan Martin is a lawyer by profession, let him leave the government and concentrate on the affairs of his clients. We want constructive criticisms and not just people saying things because they want to be heard.” On Mr Martin’s call for NPP to disclose the source of funds with which they procure fleets of brand new pick-up trucks, Mr Sanno reacted: “If Assan Martin is a good lawyer, and he is willing to know anything regarding NPP’s vehicles, I think he should launch an investigation in every government department to find out whether even a single butut is missing [and given to NPP]. I want to tell him that there are people in this country who love the NPP, President Barrow and the country. These people are in the party, they have money and they are willing to sacrifice by spending their money on the party in support of President Barrow. We have nothing to do with state funds. President Barrow doesn’t need government funds. If Assan Martin wants to know that let him go and ask government officials whether President Barrow has ever asked them for even a single butut for the NPP.” Mr Sanno said they were informed that Assan Martin had been “lobbying for something in Barrow’s government and when he failed to get that, he started making all these noises”. “His fellow lawyers are doing their job, but he is the only one criticising the government while the government is not even aware of him. Gambians know what President Barrow is doing and they appreciate him for that. Gambians will never listen to Assan Martin as he is a failed lawyer who does not even have clients. He is just wasting his time. President Barrow is not a failed president,” he added.