The opposition People’s Democratic Organisation for Independence and Socialism (PDOIS) has expressed its readiness to “cooperate with the UDP [United Democratic Party] to work assiduously for electoral reform so that no Gambian would be unreasonably and unjustifiably restricted from voting or being voted for in free, fair and genuine elections.” This assurance is contained in a solidarity the party’s Central Committee sent to the UDP as it commemorated 18 years of existence last month.
Below is the message verbatim:
“SOLIDARITY MESSAGE ON THE 18TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UDP
PDOIS CENTRAL COMMITTEE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2014
History demands that we revisit the past to become well positioned to shape the future. Commemorating 18 years of existence gives your party the opportunity to learn from the past in order to shape its future. We are in solidarity with your spirit of revival and rejuvenation. To take leadership position in the political life of a country is not an easy task. It requires the transformation of difficulties into challenges and challenges into achievements. The fact that you are commemorating your 18th Anniversary today speaks volumes of the resilience of your party. Your membership should keep hope alive and take note of the fact that a genuine multi party system is the only way to guarantee a peaceful transfer of power between and among citizens with diverse interests.
PDOIS, therefore, wishes to covey to you the assurance that it will strive day and night for a society which would create a political environment that would allow the fullest development of each party to its highest standard so that any party which comes to the helm would do its best for the good of all of us.
In this regard, PDOIS is prepared to promote a climate of common solidarity among opposition parties to combat all those factors which restrict freedom of expression, association and assembly, so as to expand the democratic space to enable the people to form opinions and support parties without hindrance.
PDOIS is ready to cooperate with the UDP to work assiduously for electoral reform so that no Gambian would be unreasonably and unjustifiably restricted from voting or being voted for in free, fair and genuine elections.
The role of an opposition party is to check the excesses of those who govern and prepare to replace those who do not utilise their mandate to govern to satisfy the expectations of the sovereign people. Opposition parties are indispensable in a democratic sovereign Republic. Those who struggle to keep opposition parties alive and vibrant are safeguarding the fundamental pillars of a democratic order.
UDP is one of the pillars of the democratic order in the Gambia and PDOIS is ever ready to give its solidarity when its legitimate rights and interests are threatened. In the same vein, we wish to express our appreciation for being invited to share the joy and the lessons associated with the commemoration of your 18th anniversary.
Forward towards the enlargement of the Democratic space!
Forward Towards Genuine Electoral Reform!
Forward Towards a Genuine Multi Party System!”
Ends
Excellent thought, honourable Sallah. May Allah bless you all..
This is a coded message and doesn’t mean anything as far as unity is concern as PDOIS is still adverse to the universal principles of coalition politics.
It could also be a strategy to dampen negative criticisms of the PDOIS party and it’s ideologically driven nonconformist leaders. I learnt that this has become a concern for PDOIS but they brought it on themselves, didn’t they? You simply can’t hoodwink an entire nation, my friends.
Thanks
Mr Touray,PDOIS is not a partry to devide Gambia but to unite us.Be positive.STOP THIS RUBBISH,ARE YOU APRC?
Lafia you are gradually coming around. This is good. You are no longer confidenly advocating for a UDP party-led alliance. Just make it formal. All opposition.political parties should then come together and try other coaltion initiatives.
Kamalo, if you are against a UDP led allaince, then you are not interested in opposition unity as it is the norm. Whether in govt or outside govt, the largest party within the coalition groups is always the leader of the coalition. Your persistent BS will not change that.
Thanks
Lafia UDP led alliance will at the expense of PDOIS will never ever happen in The Gambia without it being subjected to political a debate to convince all and sundry which party has the best strategy for a democratic transformation of the country. You are just being irrelevant on this media in your daydream advocacy for PDOIS to buy into gimmicks of UDP without any scrutiny.
Lafia Touray la Manju You are in your high horse and comfort zone persistently talking BS here because Kairo News leaning is UDP and its propaganda media!
Let any UDP militant proof to me how “party-led” applied in UK and Senegal PRIOR TO THE ELECTIONS? LET IT BE CLEAR THAT IF “PARTY-LED” WAS NORM IN SENGAL ELECTIONS MACKY SALLAH WOULD NOT PRESENTLY BE THE PRESIDENT OF SENEGAL BECAUSE IDRISSA SECKA (WHO COMMANDED MAJORITY & INSISTED OF LEADING) WOULD HAVE LED THEIR COALITION AGAINST WADDA!
In UK PRIOR TO ELECTIONS no coalition was even discussed or considered but dictated POST-ELECTIONS by hung Parliament!
AM REPEATING AGAIN; please let any UDP militant proof to me how “party-led” applied in UK and Senegal PRIOR TO THE ELECTIONS?
“MERGER OF POLITICAL PARTIES” WILL PRODUCE A UNITED NATIONAL FRONT BUT UDP IS INTRANSIGENT NOT THINKING OF CHANGING ITS FAILED ATTEMPTS TO HOODWINK OTHER OPPOSITION PARTIES ON “PARTY-LED”. NADD BLUEPRINT ONLY BECAUSE UDP “PARTY-LED” WILL NOT HAPPEN!
Please let us stop wasting our time with long theories and explanations about what kind of united front Gambia needs . The Gambian people needs help now . If you all believe that majority party shouldn’t lead then tell me who should lead. Nobody in their correct mind will accept the idea that everybody will be equal when in actually some are bringing in 2 or 3 percent on the table. In any partnerships or agreements, the larger contributor always have the majority share or lead the group but give others their due share. PDOIS is the one that wants to hoodwink other parties because they believe that they can talk their way to power by coming out with crazy theories.
NADD was a failure since in the beginning because the smaller parties wants to dominate the coalition especially PDOIS and they even decided on who they want to lead the coalition. To hell with them if they think that people are going to sit down and let them control everything. In all politics, you have to compromise but it has to be fair.
“Kamalo, if you are against a UDP led allaince, then you are not interested in opposition unity as it is the norm.”
Lafia, please consider the fact that you are trying to unite different political parties with different perspectives on how to govern the country. In this respect the communality of interest that serves both the individual parties and the nation at large should form the basis of that union. That should be the norm.
A party-led alliance neither serves the interest of the individual opposition parties nor the interest of the nation at large. So it should be rejected by all Gambians who are genuinely interested in moving the country forward.
You keep insisting that a UDP party-led alliance is the norm, but all what it does is to allow other opposition parties to help the UDP come to power.
You cannot form a coalition government as you are promising those opposition parties that come to join your party-led agenda. You can only form a UDP government. Now tell me: what is the trade off for those opposition parties who come to join your party-led alliance?
“Whether in govt or outside govt, the largest party within the coalition groups is always the leader of the coalition.”
This is where you are getting mixed up. That is why I asked earlier whether you are sure what type of coalition you are talking about.
Within the context of our Gambian political situation we don’t need a party-led coalition. So there isn’t the need for any party whether large or small to lead any opposition party. What we need is for the opposition political parties to come together and agree on how to form the next government.
The opposition political parties can either support the presidential candidate of a political party who will run on an independent ticket or an independent presidential candidate who will run on a coalition agreement. In both instances a coalition agreement would form the basis of governance. It would be specific, time conscious and durable.
The problem with the party-led agenda is that all the opposition political parties would have to support a presidential candidate who runs on an opposition party ticket. In this case the UDP.
When that presidential candidate is elected to power the UDP will form the government. So the promise that the UDP is making that when elected to power they will form a coalition government is not true. They cannot form a coalition government. They can only form a UDP government because their party and presidential candidate has been elected to power and has a mandate to form a government.
You statement is also vague: “whether in govt or outside govt. the largest party within the coalition groups is always the leader of the coalition.”
Here you are assuming that there is already a coalition group and the largest party within that coalition leads the group. Then the question becomes: lead the coalition group to do what? To enter into a coalition agreement? To formalize a coalition agreement? What are you talking about?
If you want to reference this to the UDP, UDP is not forming a coalition of the opposition political parties in which as the largest party within that coalition it can lead them to: ENTER INTO A COALITION AGREEMENT OR FORMALIZE A COALITION AGREEMENT.
What your party-led alliance is doing is merely asking other opposition parties to support the UDP presidential candidate and if elected to power the UDP will form a coalition government which it cannot do. It can only form UDP government.
So your statement does not hold water. You cunningly write it up to be so vague. It is just a general statement and if logic is applied in this case the UDP will not pass the test.
First, the UDP is not in government and it is not in any coalition. There must be an objective basis for any coalition and that is to form a government. There must be a coalition agreement as the basis of the government.
Your persistent BS will not change that.
Mr Touray is becoming a dictator for always advocating that it has to be UDP or no other party. His continuous castigation of all other opposition leaders and their parties shows how insensitive he is when it comes to UDP. The issue at hand now is not UDP, PDOIS, PPP or any other party but working together to restore sanity and democracy in The Gambia. UDP cannot do it alone as proven from previous elections. For now put aside that ego and dream of a UDP government and work with all opposition parties as a team to get rid of the bottleneck preventing you from realizing your dreams.
Here we go again
If others believe they can do it without UDP, then they must go ahead and do it. Politics is govern by principles,not egos. Thus, if there is any party out there which doesn’t want to adhere to universal norms of coalition formation and politics and are hell-bent on throwing out subterfuges to conceal their disdain for the UDP, they must go ahead and do their thing. One thing I will advise them though is that they must not think the UDP is gullible or will be foolish enough to buy into their subterfuges.
The choice of the people who made the UDP the biggest opposition party in the country has to be respected. It will amount to blatant betrayal of that same people if the UDP treat their big party statuts as not meaning anything. Of course it means something; it means they are the main opposition party in the country. If there is any party out there wanting to contest this claim, they must meet the UDP in a general election and if they can have more or the same amount of votes like the UDP, then a case for a primary or convention among the opposition parties will be considered as well made out. Otherwise, naaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am done with this one. Those who want to tick to their BS can go on.
Thanks
Lafia, these people are only present on the web. And for you to hold them to account is something they cannot phantom. There is no second round of voting in the Gambia, and to equate that to Senegal is ridiculous. In fact PDOIS has never pulled more than 7% of election result in recent presidential elections. For a meagre and footnote entity to insist on debate, their agenda, idea or philosophy taking hold is nothing sort of dictatorship. Dictatorship is at best a minority attempting to inflict its dominance over the majority.
jammeh is a dictator because he wish to enforce his singular personal wish on the entire country. Similarly, Halifa Sallah is a dictator, a little civilise but dictator in his ideas none-the-less. Halifa don’t care about nobody, or anything apart of his out date ideas. So long as Halifa remain the doyen in PDOIS, he will remain an obstacle to the progress and acceptance of PDOIS whilst fresh ideas will be flush out.
Lafia, you are spot on. Halifa shot himself on the foot. He endorsed Hamat Bah because he thought he was smart enough to bribe Hamat with 2011 leadership, guess what, Hamat pulled a blinder, and he is left bewildered, whilst he foght to see that, Lawyer don’t become a consensus candidate has also backfired. This means, Halifa will also go through the age barrier pretty soon. Merry-go-round. Just because people ignore the PDOIS ciber warlords doesn’t mean you guys can deceive the people. We know the PDOIS game. Their inner anger is simply,’since Gambians don’t accept and appreciate them, then they see no urgency to solidly join hands and end the dictatorship’. PDOIS will never do anything concrete to undermine the dictatorship. Never, it all write and write and write, argue and argue.
Thank you Mr Kora. I agreed with you that PDOIS will never be part of the solution but always be part of the problem. They have weird ideas of how to solve the issue of getting rid of Yaya Jammeh. Their way or the highway.
ALL OPPOSITION PARTIES CAN UNITE UNDER A “UNITED NATIONAL FRONT” FEASIBLE THROUGH “MERGER OF POLITICAL PARTIES”. LET UDP JOIN WITH OTHER OPPOSITION PARTIES THROUGH “MERGER OF POLITICAL PARTIES” TO LEGALLY SUPPORT A UNITED NATIONAL OPPOSITION FRONT!
It is very refreshing to see that the UDP has now recognised the importance of working for electoral reform…This must be a priority for all opposition parties, if there is to be a realistic chance of effecting change through the ballot box..
PDOIS ‘ readiness to work with them, as carried in their message of solidarity, is no surprise because it has shown itself to be a party that stands for an electoral system that provides a level playing field and guarantees free and fair elections, so that the choices made at any elections would be the true wishes of the electorate…
It is about time that the diaspora put it’s acts together,stop deluding itself as the “only opposition” to Jammeh, and work with the opposition parties on the ground, to facilitate our participation in future elections, which is our birth right. ..
Whilst every Gambia has the right to chose the manner of change they want to effect in The Gambia and to.associate with persons of similar views, it will be a complete waste of time and resources, and constitute an exercise in futility, if the current “strategy” of confronting and humiliating Jammeh abroad, is not reconsidered…
The shouting of profanities and insults at Jammeh and his mother (whatever her “crimes”) may satisfy some people’s desire and urge to do “something” about his misrule, but will very little, if anything at all, in terms of reforms and changes on the ground…One could even be excused to state that such an approach is part of the problem the opposition is facing, because it wins Jammeh some sympathy among the people, as such openly directed insults at parents is alien to Gambian culture. ..
As for the coalition efforts, I think kamalo has clearly stated the obvious problems with the UDP Party led proposal. ..
And I hope that sooner, rather than later,those who advocate a party led coalition realise that if there is any such thing as a “norm” (for building coalitions), then it must be one that considers all factors affecting a given political situation, rather than just “size”..
In The Gambian context, and as far influencing the political decision making process is concerned, the size of the UDP is no more significant than the size of PDOIS, as both parties are unable to exert their influence as they would want due to the difficult environment. ..and are almost equally affected by the tough terrain…
Working together to push for electoral reform is a good place to start from…
“It is very refreshing to see that the UDP has now recognised the importance of working for electoral reform…This must be a priority for all opposition parties, if there is to be a realistic chance of effecting change through the ballot box”..bax
Bax, once again you are manufacturing theories in your head about the UDP rather than adhering to facts.
It is a well know fact that the UDP was one of the parties which challenged the IEC on the need for electoral reform shortly before the 2012 parliamentary election. It is also a well known fact that UDP is a founding member of the G6 whose agenda was to advocate for electoral reform in the gambie before the 2016 election, and had signed a joint statement to that effect. Thus, for you to insinuate that UDP only recognise the need for electoral reform now and not before is baloney.
If you don’t know your facts, check with others rather than always throwing trash all over the place. This behaviour of yours has become a serious nuisance in this forum.
Thanks
Its a fallacy to claim that “It is a well know fact that the UDP was one of the parties which challenged the IEC on the need for electoral reform shortly before the 2012 parliamentary election.”!
Google “electoral reforms for The Gambia” and see amount of PDOIS information you will get and advocacy well before 2006 elections by PDOIS up to level of ECOWAS court.
Lafia…
Don’t get too hot under the collar….There’s a difference between “the need for reform” and “recognising the importance of reform”, vis a vis, winning elections….
So calm down bro….
“If others believe they can do it without UDP, then they must go ahead and do it.”
Lafia, if the UDP think they can do it without others let them go ahead and do it on their own. It cuts both ways.
” Politics is govern by principles,not egos. Thus, if there is any party out there which doesn’t want to adhere to universal norms of coalition formation and politics and are hell-bent on throwing out subterfuges to conceal their disdain for the UDP, they must go ahead and do their thing.”
Now, whose politics is govern by egos? Our politics is govern by reason. It is govern by ideas and discipline. Those whose politics is govern by egos can easily be discern from reading the contents of these exchanges. Those who are intransigent in maintaining their wrong views despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
You keep using erroneously the phrase “universal norm of coalition formation and politics.” Whatever this phrase means one thing is for sure: it is not applicable to the Gambian political situation and reality. I still cannot fathom how you can tie this phrase to your desire to have a UDP party-led coalition agenda.
What you want to do is not to form a coalition. With a coalition there is first a coalition agreement between the coalition partners. Second, the coalition agreement must be formalized and publicized. Third, the formalized and publicized coalition agreement will form the objective basis for a coalition government. None of these three factors are true of the purported UDP party-led alliance/coalition agenda.
What happened to the OJ talking points? It has been discredited. We have shown beyond any shadow of doubt that if the UDP is elected to power through a UDP party-led alliance it cannot form a coalition government as promised. It can only form a UDP government. This negates the premise on which your party-led alliance agenda is based on namely; that you will form a coalition/alliance government. It is a lie.
” One thing I will advise them though is that they must not think the UDP is gullible or will be foolish enough to buy into their subterfuges.”
Nobody is asking you to buy into anything. We are merely stating the facts and correcting your wrong assumptions. You are the one accusing people that they are not interested in opposition unity and try to blame others where the blame instead should be squarely on the shoulders of you and your party.
“The choice of the people who made the UDP the biggest opposition party in the country has to be respected. It will amount to blatant betrayal of that same people if the UDP treat their big party statuts as not meaning anything. Of course it means something; it means they are the main opposition party in the country.”
Why then are you asking other opposition parties to come and help you in your party-led agenda so that you can be elected to power? If everything is so sweet and dandy and you are the largest opposition party in the country why don’t you keep doing your thing as you have been doing for the past 18 years? You are so full of it. Talk about arrogance.
“If there is any party out there wanting to contest this claim, they must meet the UDP in a general election and if they can have more or the same amount of votes like the UDP, then a case for a primary or convention among the opposition parties will be considered as well made out. Otherwise, naaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
Well, we will wait and see how this one ends.
I am done with this one. Those who want to tick to their BS can go on.
Thanks
Reply
“Don’t get too hot under the collar….There’s a difference between “the need for reform” and “recognising the importance of reform”, vis a vis, winning elections…”.bax
Bax is such a clown.
Difference between “the need for reform” and “recognising the importance for reform”. Are you kidding?? I thought all the parties signed the G6 statement on electoral reform, didn’t they??
Ok, I said UDP recognises the need for electoral reform. Now tell me what “recognising the importance of electoral reform” means in English.
I think you need to sort out yourself bro and go back to school. You are such a nuisance in this forum. Absolutely no doubt about that.
Thanks
Lafia….
I see.you are having fun on a trivial issue, aren’t you…Well, let’s have fun…
I.am not “kidding you” about there being a difference between the two phrases….
Why did the UDP “challenge the IEC on the need for electoral reform…?”
I am assuming that because they recognise the importance of reforms to achieve their aim of defeating the APRC….In other words, without these reforms, the chances of defeating the APRC are near zero…
However, when they make claims that without these reforms, they will still defeat the APRC, then I wonder whether they really understand/recognise the importance of these reforms….
It is as if acknowledging that electoral reform is needed, but it is not important to achieve their aims of defeating the APRC…Which does suggest a lack of appreciation of the significance of those reforms…
But, I hold my hand up and say that I got it wrong…If it pleases you….
Ok but you still haven’t told me the difference between the two, bax. Trivialism, that is your trade, not mine.
It looks like kamalo is overtaking you on trivialism and nuisance.
The purpose of electoral reform is not to defeat the incumbent but to provide a fair system that can allow parties to compete fairly without being unduly disadvantaged. In the last election, it was noted by all observers that there was a serious abuse of incumbency which grossly disadvantaged the opposition. Electoral reform is only meant to correct this imbalance, not to defeat the ruling. That is why even the APRC is needed in this process to ensure that Gambia have a credible electoral system that will allow the sovereign people of The Gambia to choose a government of their choice in free fair and periodic elections.
Thanks
And why do you need a “fair system…?” Is it just for the sake of it..?
Kamalo is brilliant in.the way he is exposing and “destroying” you and your twisted logic and claims…That’s why you fled…A common strategy of yours…
A fair electoral system is required to accord credibility to the electoral process and the results it produce.
Thanks