Kairo News has confirmed the resignation of three members of the Committee for the Restoration of Democracy in the Gambia (CORDEG). This came on the heels of the immediate withdrawal of the Gambia Democratic Action Group (GDAG) from CORDEG on Sunday.
The members who tendered their resignations with immediate effect were the Steering Committee Representatives for the Scandanavia, Jainaba Bah of Sweden and Demba Dem of The Netherlands. Also parting with CORDEG was the North Carolina based Lamin Tunkara who until his resignation was the Director of Administration, Technology and Logistics of CORDEG.
All these people threw in their towel after they were dissatisfied with CORDEG’s operations. CORDEG emanated from the May 2013 Gambia Conference for Democracy and Good Governance held in the city of Raleigh, North Carolina.
The conference brought together Gambians from all walks of life to discuss on how to defeat dictatorship in the Gambia and restore democracy, the rule of law and good governance in the country.
Kairo News has written to the Chairman of CORDEG Dr. Abdoulaye Saine, requesting for his reaction to the resignation galore.
Ends
Burr Saine will probably take this invitation very personal and would not respond. May be he will proof me wrong.
Thanks
INSTEAD OF HOW TO DEFEAT THE DICTATOR CORDEG IS JUST A FAILURE,WE ARE FEDUP WITH SOMEBODY OR A GROUP TRYING TO TELL US WHAT FUTURE WE WANT,EVERY GAMBIAN WANT A BETTER FUTURE FOR GENERATION AND GENERATION BUT THIS PEOPLE WANT TO CHANGE THE GAMBIA IN THEIR OWN LONGTIME LIVING IN A WHITE MAN COUNTRY TOO LONG.MR DEM TOLD ME THIS LONGTIME SO AM NOT SUPRISE,YOU GUYS DO NOT REPRESENT US IN EUROPE NOT IN HOLLAND PERHAPS ENGLAND AND AMERICA.MANOEVRE!THIS IS WHAT YAYA HAVE DONE,PREACHINMG ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY THATS NEVER IN HIS D.N.A.I HEARD SOME LOUD PEOPLE SAYING SOME PEOPLE WHEN THEY DO NOT HAVE IT THEIR WAY,THEY ALWAYS QUIT,BUT COME ON EVEN YAYA JAMMEH’S TWENTY YEARS HE FOOL SOME GAMBIANS BUT HE CANNOT FOOL EVERY GAMBIAN.I HEARD PEOPLE TALK AGAINST CORDEG BUT I THINK IS A FAILURE,INFACT WHAT CRITERIA HAVE CORDEG USE IN THEIR SELECTION OR ELECTION,BECAUSE I HEARD THEM SAYING THIS IS THE FIRST DEMOCRATIC GAMBIAN ENTITY,DO YOU THINK YOU CAN TEACH GAMBIANS ABOUT DEMOCRACY.WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND!NO CARMOUFLAGE FOLKS WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER BUT ONLY THE TRUTH CAN SAFE THE MOTHERLAND!SOME OF THESE FOLKS CONFUSE THIS STRUGGLE, UNDERMINED LIGITIMATE POLITICAL ENTITY WITH FALSE FABRICATION AND LIES.CORDEG IS A FAILURE BECAUSE IT LACK THRUST,GAMBIANS DO NOT HAVE CONFIDENT AND THRUST,SO AGAIN,NO MANOEVRE,NO CARMPOUFLAGE AND NO MORE MANIPULATION.
It is unfortunate that so much good that could have resulted from Raleigh have been wasted, but it is a good lesson for all in the diaspora (and at home) who yearn for genuine change in our country..
That no matter how much effort we put in the struggle or how much “dust” we raise abroad, we WILL NEVER be the leading vehicles for change in The Gambia…That role.belongs to the opposition parties and opponents of the regime on the ground and the sooner we give them that credit, the better for us…
A bit of humility from most, if not all diaspora activists, would have prevented this disgraceful disintegration of the struggle abroad into near chaos….Let’s complement the opposition and opponents’ efforts on the ground, rather than try to substitute it…
It goes without saying that if PDOIS’ good advice had been followed prior to Raleigh, this scenario could have been avoided…
May be it’s time to go back to the drawing board..Better late than never..
There was no advice from PDOIS and nobody needs advice from them either. They were invited just like all the others parties and they declined, which is their right. They also advance a reason for their refusal to attend and that was it.
CORDEG was designed to compliment the efforts of the opposition, not to lead them. Unfortunately, some over zealous hijacked the project and now it is a failure.Time for a re-think, Burr Saine.
I listened to Professor Saine on Freedom Radio with Mr Mbaye and, though he does not come across to me as an individual with ulterior motives, I think he should recognise (if he hasn’t by now) that CORDEG needs to be dissolved and a new arrangement entered into, which will seek to unite all groups and reflect the true role of the diaspora in the struggle…
CORDEG CANNOT be, and should never have sought to be,the umbrella organisation under which all anti Jammeh groups, including the legitimately registered opposition parties should rally….It’s role should have been restricted to overseeing and coordinating the diaspora activities and liaising with the opposition at home to pursue a common agenda…
In my view, the predicament of the diaspora struggle is the result of genuine mistakes and inexperience, rather covert plans to high jack the struggle for personal aims/ambitions/agenda. ..
It is not wrong for individuals to have (political) ambitions…What we must guard against is the use of national office/organisations to achieve such ambitions.. That is why institutions must put mechanism and safe guards in place to avoid this, and judging by complaints about the election of CORDEG Officials, I am not certain if the Raleigh Conference had succeeded in doing that…
I repeat, once again, it may be time to go back to the drawing board…
The wolves in the sheep clothes in this endless struggle, will soon be exposed to the Gambians of their dis tractive behaviours, patience required. May the Almighty Allah guide us all..
Let justice guide our actions
Lafia….
May be you don’t realise it, but your insincerity is harming your credibility or what’s left of it,after my in-law exposed you…And here’s why….
You stated…..Quote…” There was no advice from PDOIS “..
You probably have not read PDOIS Statement relating to their absence from Raleigh or you lacked the skills to understand plain English…Either way,you have not done yourself any favours by making such foolish claims in the public space…
I could not access the original PDOIS Statement but I found something which will do for now…
In his response to D.A.Jawo,carried by several online papers,Halifa stated the following…..
.”…….allow us to state that when we received the invitation of the organisers, we did applaud their initiative….However in order to promote ownership of the process and engender a more formal arrangement for consensus building we proposed….(my own emphasis now)
(a) For the Diaspora to meet and work out a Consensus,the content of which will be conveyed to the political parties at home for review and decisions taken by their own organs in line with their party constitutions;
(b) We further proposed that after taking their individual party positions on any proposals from the diaspora,political parties could meet and discuss their party positions and form a consensus which shall then be followed by a Diaspora-Opposition meeting……”
Does this not constitute advice….?
To be continued….
Bax, this was not an advice to CORDEG but STGDP and Gdag who were the organisers of the Railiegh conference. The aim was not craft an agenda or pathway for the diaspora but to get Gambians in the diaspora in colloboration with the opposition to craft a pathway for themselves. CORDEG came into being well after Raileigh and pursuant to the accord signed thereto. PDOIS cannot continue to adopt the ‘my way on the highway’ strategy and expect to be taken seriously.
I like your name calling. Please continue.
Thanks
Bax, this was not an advice to CORDEG but STGDP and Gdag who were the organisers of the Railiegh conference, and it may not even be true as PDOIS have a propensity of lying as was evident in the NADD debacle. There was no CORDEG at the material time in reference.
The aim of the Reileigh Conference was not to craft an agenda or pathway for the diaspora but to get Gambians in the diaspora talk and in colloboration with the opposition, craft a pathway for themselves. Clearly, if PDOIS had anything to say, that was the right forum for it.
CORDEG came into being well after Raleigh Conference and in pursuant to the accord signed thereto.
PDOIS cannot continue to adopt the ‘my way or the highway’ strategy and expect to be taken seriously.
I like your name calling. Please continue.
Thanks
This is not about PDOIS, and for that reason, I am refusing to be distracted.
Thanks
You also stated….” and nobody needs advice from them anyway…”
I’m interested ( and I’m sure many are too) to know who else you speak for apart from yourself…
So you read PDOIS reasons for not attending the Raleigh Conference but failed to see any advice (proposal) from it…Curious…
You further stated….” CORDEG was designed to compliment (complement) the efforts of the opposition but not to lead them….”
Firstly, I don’t know what your point of argument is here because I did not state that CORDEG was “designed to lead anyone..”
All I stated was that “the leading role for changed will be played by Gambians on the ground; not the ones in the Diaspora. ..”
But then I looked at the CORDEG Vision Statement and I’m not sure if your claim is altogether right..
Here’s what CORDEG claims…
It describes itself as ….
“an independent, non – profit, transnational democratic umbrella organisation….”
……and
” the home of Gambian opposition parties and civil society organisations at home and in Gambia’s various Diasporas. .”
CORDEG then claims that….” it enjoys wide MANDATE and LEGITIMACY as the recognized representative and voice of the Gambian opposition the world over…”
Sounds like complementing opposition efforts to you..? More.like substituting the opposition…
But then, will you ever change…?
Those who designed CORDEG’s mission statement lack legitimacy for they have been elected through skewed election that does not reflect the will of the people and not what was envisaged in Raleigh .
The UDP did not participate in the Raleigh conference to have themselves substituted by CORDEG. Common sense also tells us that they would not have accepted that given their position on leadership of any coalition involving them.
Given what I know about pdois’s lying propensity, I don’t take serious anything they put out in public unless independently verified.
Thanks
In any case, PDOIS have not said anything to the right forum and body, The Raleigh Confernce, as they were not in attendance neither do they addressed any communication to this body. These are the facts.
CORDEG is suppose to be a unifying force but for the actions of certain over zealous people under the control and direction of chairman Saine beh chi Saloum.
Sometimes I struggle to understand how you reason and the logic in your arguments.
First, you claimed that ” there was no advice from PDOIS”…
Now you are contradicting yourself and even worse, you are exposing your inability to read and understand plain English…
Quote…” Bax this was not an advice to CORDEG but STGDP and GDAG …”
Here’s how…You are now admitting that there was advice from PDOIS, after all, but only meant for STGDP & GDAG….
Then to make yourself look very silly, you claimed that this advice was not meant for CORDEG. ..But even an idiot who followed events leading to Raleigh knows that CORDEG did NOT exist then..
How could PDOIS be sending/directing advice to a non existent entity. .? See how silly you sound….It’s not name calling…It’s obvious…
Of course, this is not about PDOIS, but just a reflection into history and what could have been if the wisdom of good advice was accepted by the organisers of Raleigh.
To expose your insincerity and hypocrisy further, let me again quote you…
Quote…” This may not even be true as PDOIS has the propensity of lying…”
The whole world who followed events leading to Raleigh know that PDOIS released a statement to explain why it was immature to convene a Diaspora – Opposition conference without each group first working on a consensus. ..and here you are shamelessly disputing that. ..
But will you ever change..?
As far as the Raleigh Conference is concern, there is no advice from PDOIS neither was any needed. The Raleigh conference was the body and process that gave birth to CORDEG.
Mai Fatty addressed a letter to the Raleigh Conference and it was read out. If PDOIS had address a letter to the conference, it would have been read out too and possibly deliberated upon. However, if PDOIS chose Misdirected their advice, assuming their was one, then that is down to their misjudgement. The rest of us should not be bothered about that.
Thanks
I didn’t admit to anything. You presented a statement here which supports my claim that neither the Raleigh Conference nor CORDEG received advice from PDOIS as PDOIS refused to engage the right forum and body. I also pointed that even going by the statement you presented, nothing there was addressing the Raleigh conference or CORDEG, the only relevant bodies.
Knowing fully about pdois’s lying propensity, Ofcourse I don’t believe a word from them unless independently verified. In any case, that is not relevant as the right body was not addressed in what you term as PDOIS advice.
Thanks
I believe Dr Burr a Saine is the right person to lead CORDEG but he needs to stop taking people as bunch of fools. Having PhD does not make you wiser than everybody else.
Thanks
Bax the lack of unity of the opposition parties was the reason for a conference to formulate a strategy.
I am of the school of thought that democracy can neither be imported nor exported but Gambian’s case is complex.
Advocates for letting the opposition parties figure it out have to tell us how to overcome the problem of factions in Gambian politics.
In Senegal it was easy, in Gambia we see our selfs as tribes and regions before Gambians.
Who is leading is more important to the Gambian than solving the problem.
Unless we stop being selfish , regionalist and tribalist Yahya’s son Ismali will be the next president.
And it will be our making. Both you and Mr Touray are smart educated men, why not sit with our selfs and figure out a common ground rather than arguing over everything .
Lafia…
Your knack for twisting things to suit your narrative is at display here again and shows clearly how disingenuous you can be…
Just look at this….” As far as the Raleigh Conference was concerned there was no advice from PDOIS. …”
Who said anything about PDOIS’ advice to the Raleigh Conference…?
What I stated, which you instantly jumped upon, was something in the line , ” that if the wisdom of the good advice from PDOIS was accepted, the disgraceful disintegration of the struggle, which resulted from the conference ,could have been avoided…”
The advice I mentioned was sent to the organisers when PDOIS received its invitation and only made public when they had to respond to critics for their failure to attend the conference…How does that support your claims..?
What do.you.mean.by the “right” forum and why should PDOIS address that forum..?
Raleigh has turned out to be, not just an end in itself, but the catalyst for the mistrust, back stabbing and disunity that has characterised the Diaspora struggle for a long time…
And in that respect, PDOIS has demonstrated immense wisdom, deep understanding of issues and maturity to stay away from Raleigh, as well as superiority of organisational ideas to achieve concrete results…
Those who attended Raleigh must be collectively responsible for the utter failure of the initiative and disgraceful outcome of the conference…No sacred lambs here..
That is the verdict of history and you cannot take it away…
Just look at this….” As far as the Raleigh Conference was concerned there was no advice from PDOIS. …”
Who said anything about PDOIS’ advice to the Raleigh Conference…?- bax
This is my vindication then. No advice from PDOIS.
Raleigh was only meant to engender dialogue and have succeed in that respect. It is the next step, the formation of CORDEG that is proving to be a bit of a challenge and I hope the process is salvaged sooner rather than later. It is not a total collapse. Dr Saine and others will just have to learn from their mistakes and get the process going once again.
People have no time to look into misdirected statements.
Thanks
And by the way, I do not consider the present CORDEG executive as legitimate although I still believe Dr Saine is a suitable candidate to lead the group. He just need to stop taking Gambians as a bunch of fools just because he has PhD.
Thanks
Jason Miller…
I have no problem agreeing with you that the Raleigh Conference was the result of the opposition’s inability to reach a common agreement/consensus for a united challenge to the APRC….And I.also.agree with you that Democracy can neither be imported, nor exported…It must be developed and nurtured over time…However, I must point out that notwithstanding this fact, Democracy has got basic, fundamental tenets which are the same the world over…
I must also point out that whilst Lafia and.myself, as well.as the many diaspora groups or individuals may influence the cause of.events for.change in the Gambia, we will.not be the people who will effect that change…
That onus lies with the people on the ground and so far , they have failed to rise up to the challenge….Our exchanges on line will have very little impact, if any, on the cause of events…So let’s not loose sleepless nights over these arguments/debates…
It is true that Senegal has achieved political change in what seems.to be an easy manner, but whilst the two.scenarios may look.similar, in actual fact, they are miles.apart and have experienced completely different political backgrounds from Independence to date. ..
Senegal is a.country that was founded on, and nurtured the principles.of, open.debate and discussions, earning it the name,”Payee de dialogue”….
Opposition politicians criticised government in the Assemble’ Nationale and it was broadcast on ORTS (National TV and Radio); Religious leaders criticised government and it was relayed on national. Media; Musicians criticised government and their songs were played on national media…A cultured was being developed and nurtured and it was one of open scrutiny of officials and active participation of the population…
I do not want to say much.about our past, because it is the past, but we need to.scrutinise it to understand why we.are where we are today. ..It was a completely different environment to.what was happening next door. ..
Ours was a system that was founded on, and nurtured the culture.of what I.will.call.”conformity”…
Until 1994, if you have the courage to criticise the powers that be,you don’t get harassed or arrested but you don’t get heard. ..and you are marginalised. Opposition politicians don’t get heard because Parliament proceedings are not broadcast and they had no.access to the radio; Religious leaders don’t criticise government, nor do musicians. Conformists are rewarded and suspected opponents are denied and marginalised. ..A culture of.conformity and docility was being developed and nurtured, the result.of.the sorry state of affairs today…
To be continued. …
“Who said anything about PDOIS’ advice to the Raleigh Conference…?- bax. ”
I’m sorry to say this but you are lying between your teeth Lafia…
Here’s what I.posted from.the start, which you have reacted to and are trying to twist because you have been exposed. ..
“It goes without saying that if PDOIS’ good advice had been followed prior to Raleigh, this scenario could have been avoided…”
If you understand simple English,you would know what the phrase, “prior to Raleigh ” means…
But you.will.never change..The disease in your.heart is debilitating…
You do not understand the issues bax. PDOIS addressed none of the relevant bodies and have refused to engage the process. This is the fact. You can shout as much as you like and call me names. It doesn’t and won’t change a dime.
Thanks
@ Lafia Touray la Manjul posted June 25, 2014 at 10:28 PM QUOTED;
“You do not understand the issues bax. PDOIS addressed none of the relevant bodies and have refused to engage the process. This is the fact. You can shout as much as you like and call me names. It doesn’t and won’t change a dime.
Thanks”
1. PLEASE HELP US UNDERSTAND “THE ISSUES” YOU ARE INSINUATING?
2. WHAT “RELEVANT BODIES” PDOIS ARE SUPPOSED TO “ADDRESSED” OR WERE “ADDRESSED” BY OTHER OPPOSITION PARTIES; ESPECIALLY UDP, PPP, NRP & GMC?
3. WHAT “PROCESS” AND HOW OTHER UDP, PPP, NRP & GMC PARTICIPATED IN THAT “PROCESS”?
NOTE “PROCESS” DEFINED IN DICTIONARY.COM:
“a systematic series of actions directed to some end” or
“a continuous action, operation, or series of changes taking place in a definite manner.”
4. PLEASE FORWARD ANY FORMAL “RESOLUTION” OR “PROPOSALS” FOR RALEIGH CONFERENCE FROM UDP, PPP, NRP & GMC BECAUSE PDOIS HAVE FORWARDED ITS “RESOLUTIONS” & “PROPOSALS” ON RECORD?
AGAIN NOTE “RESOLUTION” DEFINED IN DICTIONARY.COM:
“1.
a formal expression of opinion or intention made, usually after voting, by a formal organization, a legislature, a club, or other group. Compare concurrent resolution, joint resolution.
2.
a decision or determination; a resolve: to make a firm resolution to do something. Her resolution to clear her parents’ name allowed her no other focus in life.
3.
the act determining upon an action or course of action, method, procedure, etc.; the act of resolving.
4.
firmness of purpose; the mental state or quality of being resolved or resolute: She showed her resolution by not attending the meeting.
5.
the act or process of separating into constituent or elementary parts or resolving”
Continued…..
Quote Jason…..
“Advocates for letting the opposition parties figure it out have to tell us how to overcome the problem of factions in Gambian politics.”
Comment…..Believe it or not Jason,I am as frustrated as you are that the opposition could not find a workable arrangement to take on the APRC and give itself a realistic chance of winning the elections…I am also aware of claims by many self appointed analysts and commentators, who spread the views that elections cannot remove Yaya jammeh because of “this” or “that” reason, but without providing any supporting statistics or data to support their claims…( and thus,unfortunately and ignorantly,help perpetuate Yaya Jammeh’s calculated lies that ” NO ELECTIONS CAN REMOVE HIM )… This is indeed very unfortunate because the electoral data we have at our disposal, (ie,total number of registered voters,number that vote,percentage of votes received by various candidates & voter apathy) gives much credence to the possibility of defeating Yaya Jammeh at the polls,than what these “analysts/commentators” claim…(but that’s a discussion for another day)..
What I want to say for now is that it is a strange view which is held by many people,that somehow,the differences that exist between our political parties (opposition),which you call ” factions in Gambian politics”,is a problem which has to be resolved if they must achieve electoral success against Jammeh’s APRC…
It is strange because the people who make this claim are advocates of Multi-Party Democracy,which by its nature,promotes the co-existence of different political parties….with different set-ups,programmes,agenda,policies,etc…The only way we can solve/overcome these “factions” is to eradicate/ban Multi-Party Democracy…( God forbid)…Political differences ( factions) are an essential ingredient of a vibrant multiparty democracy…
In instances where cooperation is required,different Political Parties enter into strategic arrangements to address specific political issues that affect them, but the nature,form and duration of these arrangements is determined by a whole host of issues relating to the political realities on the ground,which they are confronted with and have to grapple with..There is no single formular for these arrangements because no two situations are the same…That is why citing Senegal is of very little use to the Gambia because the realities on the ground and political cultures are like Night and Day..
In my view,the arrangement that best suits the Gambian situation is one that puts the two most important factors at the center…
(1) Electoral victory is determined by a simple majority…..(2) No single opposition party can achieve electoral success due to the nature of the system and massive voter apathy…
Therefore,since no single party can enter into government by itself,no party should seek an arrangement that puts it into office at the expense of the rest…That would constitute a ” back door” strategy to get into government…
Bax you said “I do not want to say much about our past, because it is the past, but we need to scrutinize it to understand why we are where we are today” I must admit I was impressed with your responses. Could you kindly tell me what you are referring by past. I believe we need to discuss the past, understand it in order to move forward.
By this comment ” Therefore ,since no single party can enter into government by itself, no party should seek an arrangement that puts it into office at the expense of the rest…That would constitute a ” back door” strategy to get into government” I take it you mean it will not be fair to the smaller opposition parties to accept a UDP party led coalition.
Given that UDP commands the most votes do you think it is fair to expect UDP to take a back seat to a smaller party?
Sorry for mentioning Senegal again but the smaller Senegalese opposition parties supported the candidate with the most votes, why cant the Gambian’s accept this formula. Senegalese Government came to power at the expense of others?
what do you think is the way forward, in your opinion what is a workable formular
@ Bax on Quote Jason…..
“Advocates for letting the opposition parties figure it out have to tell us how to overcome the problem of factions in Gambian politics.”
FIRST POINT to note here is that those “ADVOCATES” (described by Abdul Savage as “CROWDED DIASPORA” are the very ones blaming opposition parties) who are THE TOOTHLESS LIONS, SPOILERS & RESPONSIBLE for FRAGMENTED OPPOSITION FRONT; mainly diaspora dissidents WITH LOT OF ANIMOSITY, PITTING OPPOSITION PARTY LEADERS; UNDERMINING THE STRUGGLE (i.e MOBILISING A UNITED OPPOSITION FRONT THROUGH SPIRIT OF NATIONAL UNITY & SOLIDARITY) TO GET RID OF DICTATORSHIP & PUPPET APRC GOVERNMENT by promoting PARTISAN AGENDA & LACK OF SENSE OF DIRECTION; INTER ALIA.
SECOND POINT to note is the MANY “FACTIONS IN GAMBIAN POLITICS” namely;
a. Disfranchised diaspora dissidents Vs Opposition parties on the ground (& its leaders)
b. Furthermore in disfranchised diaspora dissidents there are many CSO and certain elites pursuing different agendas, exercising or fighting for LEADERSHIP, POWER OF CONTROL & OWNERSHIP OF THE POLITICAL STRUGGLE?
QUOTING my friend/mate & freedom fighter Abdul Savage; “The only thing standing between you and making a difference of change is: YOU!”
@ Bax on Quote Jason…..
“Advocates for letting the opposition parties figure it out have to tell us how to overcome the problem of factions in Gambian politics.”
FIRST POINT to note here is that those “ADVOCATES” (described by Abdul Savage as “CROWDED DIASPORA” are the very ones blaming opposition parties) who are THE TOOTHLESS LIONS, SPOILERS & RESPONSIBLE for FRAGMENTED OPPOSITION FRONT; mainly diaspora dissidents WITH LOT OF ANIMOSITY, PITTING OPPOSITION PARTY LEADERS; UNDERMINING THE STRUGGLE (i.e MOBILISING A UNITED OPPOSITION FRONT THROUGH SPIRIT OF NATIONAL UNITY & SOLIDARITY) TO GET RID OF DICTATORSHIP & PUPPET APRC GOVERNMENT by promoting PARTISAN AGENDA & LACK OF SENSE OF DIRECTION; INTER ALIA.
SECOND POINT to note is the MANY “FACTIONS IN GAMBIAN POLITICS” namely;
a. Disfranchised diaspora dissidents Vs Opposition parties on the ground (& its leaders)
b. Furthermore in disfranchised diaspora dissidents there are many CSO and certain elites pursuing different agendas, exercising or fighting for LEADERSHIP, POWER OF CONTROL & OWNERSHIP OF THE POLITICAL STRUGGLE?
THIRD POINT is most DANGEROUS SECTARIAN/TRIBALISM POLITICS by bigots, extremists, fanatics & lunatics engaged FASCISM ACTIVISM!
QUOTING my friend/mate & freedom fighter Abdul Savage; “The only thing standing between you and making a difference of change is: YOU!
Dema waru. Cordeg’s silence sucks. We expect them to write and explain or resign for shutting us down.
Where’s loud mouth Banka in all these?
Good point Ndey Nyang mballow. Personally, I think CORDEG should listen to critics and be prepared to address legitimate concerns. They still have the time to redeem themselves and salvage the struggle.
Thanks
FIRST POINT: DAMAGE WAS DONE BEFORE RALEIGH MANDATED “STEERING COMMITTEE” TRANSFORMED INTO CORDEG!
SECOND POINT: CORDEG DOES NOT HAVE ANY MANDATE & “IRREDEEMABLE” AND CAN ONLY OPERATE, CONTINUE & CONSIDERED AS CSO BUT WITH DUPLICITY AND CONFLICTING INTERESTS AGAINST YET TO BE CREATED THE PROPERLY MANDATED RALEIGH “STEERING COMMITTEE” ENVISAGED TO MOBILISE AND SUPPORT A UNITED NATIONAL FRONT!???
THIRD POINT: CORDEG IS A PROJECT FAILURE AND ALL THOSE RESPONSIBLE SHOULD RESIGN & DISSOLVE CORDEG. WE KNEW THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR TRANSFORMING “STEERING COMMITTEE” INTO CORDEG BUT I BELIEVE DR. ABDOULIE SAINE IS A VICTIM AND NOT CULPABLE OF CORDEG’S FAILURE. THOSE RESPONSIBLE WERE SAME ONES WHO TENDERED FIRST ORIGINAL “STEERING COMMITTEE” NOMINATING SCOUNDREL SIDIA JATTA & INCLUDING CERTAIN OPPOSITION MEMBERS (ESPECIALLY UDP LEADER OUSAINOU DARBOE, O.J AND MAI FATTY) WHO WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. THESE OPPOSITION LEADERS STAY MUTE UNTIL LATER MAI FATTY RESIGNED FROM CORDEG!
Jason Miller. ..
Let’s leave the past for now…I do agree that we need to look into it to understand the present, in order to shape the future..But we cannot delve into the past without its main players taking centre stage, which will be a major distraction for the task at hand…Moreover, except for teenagers (13-19 yr olds) and young adults (20-25+), many of us know the past because we lived in it..So we shouldn’t dedicate much time on it, for now…
Moving onto your 2nd point, it is.important that I begin by saying that I am not a member of any party and has not voted in The Gambia for a long time…I do.agree a lot with many of the positions that PDOIS takes and it would probably be my party of choice, if I ever choose to join a political party…
Furthermore, my views/opinions are only mine and are not representative of any groups or individuals…They have been formed from experience, listening, reading and observing events as they unfold(ed)..
Let me say that I will.be as happy as anyone if the opposition agrees to go by the UDP Proposal to put it into office and then fight it at the any future elections, with or without achieving their desired reforms..But since there seems to be little willingness for this approach, we should look at the other proposal ( from PDOIS) to determine which best suits our circumstances…
Continued….
Let me try and lay the premise on which my views/position are/is formed/held…
I am of the view that election results in any democratic set up/electoral system,serve 3 main purposes. …
(1) To win candidates the seat/office or put a candidate into the 2nd round (where 2nd round voting applies & exist) ;
( 2) For statistical/historical/educational purposes ;
( 3 ) For internal party use….
As far as collision efforts are concerned in the Gambia, it is my view that only (1) is relevant…
In other words, the votes that UDP, NRP, PDOIS, etc polled are irrelevant because they neither won them the elections, nor put them into a 2nd round as it doesn’t apply in our case…Equally, the votes polled by these parties in previous elections (eg 1996) were irrelevant in any subsequent elections (eg 2001)..Therefore, to continue insisting on previous election results as the right and legitimacy to lead any collision is baseless and simply laughable…If it (the votes) doesn’t get you into office, it’s meaningless, except for (2) & (3) above..If anybody believes differently,I would like to know their views…
However, it’s well and good if the other parties agree to go with it, but if they refuse (as the case is in the Gambia), then the UDP has got no justification, legal or otherwise, to continue insisting that they have the mandate to lead any collision. ..
Continued. …
The argument that most UDP supporters and fans put forward is that their approach is the universal norm for collision formation…This, in my view, is a very shallow argument because it fails to take other factors, which exist in different political situations, into consideration.Such factors include (but not limited to) the political system, the legal frameworks (constitutions), the political culture and practices, the historical experiences, etc..
This brings me to your 3rd point which relates to Senegal…
It is a fallacy, or at least erroneous, for us to continue to claim or give the impression that there was a collision of willing partners in Senegal..There was no such thing…
The collision that emerged in Senegal, as in Brazil or UK, was in fulfilment of Constitutional requirements or common practice, as I.believe to be the case in the UK. ..
In Senegal, all candidates who were interested and qualified, contested the 1st ballot..Even Youssou Ndour, the face of the collision, was willing to contest if he wasn’t barred by the constitutional/Supreme Court..
What determined the shape, form and duration of that collision, was 3 of the factors I mentioned earlier…ie, (1) the electoral system ; ( 2) the legal framework (constitution) and (3) the experience. ..
Explanation. ..
(1) Unlike Gambia, Senegal does not have a “first past the post” system…(simple majority)… If it does, Wade would still have been President and we wouldn’t be talking about any collision ..
Its system requires a candidate to poll 50% or more to be declared the winner at the 1st ballot…
If the leading candidate fails to achieve 50% or more of the votes, then ( (2)..Legal framework) Constitutional requirement kicks in…That is, the two leading candidates go into the 2nd round, where “first past the post” comes into play…Any collisions formed thereafter cannot be described as that of willing partners because everyone else is DISQUALIFIED…The process becomes easy where ( (3)…experience) is present and Senegal has been there and done it before..
Continued. ..
As for The Gambia, it is.my view that the best proposal is.one that envisages a short term arrangement, with specific, achievable targets/programmes, to give each party a fair chance or opportunity to present its case to the electorate…
We must be aware of the fact that Gambia’s governance system is one that places enormous powers in the executive,and absolute, unchecked control over both Central and Local Governments,thus negating any room for a collision government…Any collision arrangements in government (under our current system) would only be worth the paper on which it is written, but will have no legal bases, whatsoever. ..
Simply put, if the parties agree to go with the UDP Party lead proposal, this would be the likely scenario. ..
All parties would rally behind the UDP Party which will.present Mr Darboe ( or it’s chosen leader) as the Presidential Candidate of a united opposition, using UDP colours and party symbols ;
As far as the law (and the electoral body) is concerned,the other parties did not contest the elections ;
If voted, Mr Darboe would be required by the law to form.a UDP Government..Of course, as President, he has the prerogative to appoint anybody or create any portfolios he chooses..;
But (and herein lies the danger), if contradictions emerge between the UDP and its collision partners, to a point that they can no longer work together,the President could dismiss and replace them with his own party officials, creating a 100% UDP Government, without any consequences to his government…
We could.then.have a.scenario, where a party that could not have won the elections by itself, using the genuine desire of its collision partners, to enter into government and entrench itself..(a truly “back door” strategy)..
Continued. .
Thanks Bax
Lafia Touray; What Bax said about agenda 2011 is not a bad idea. Why do you think UDP didn’t entertain this idea?
What is UDP’s argument against agenda 2011?
Jason, I refer you to their online articles on this issue. I think you need to stop wasting your time on bax. This guy is not well schooled and understands nothing about political principles and law.
Ask by bax to cite you the law that says Darboe must establish a UDP govt if elected under UDP ticket?? As far as the law is concern; he would have formed a government of the republic of The Gambia.
Thanks