Showing posts with the label Rejoinder

REJOINDER | Open Letter to Citizens’ Alliance – Re: Your Public References Denoting Violence

  In a press conference held or  broadcast  on Friday 15 th  January 2021 which was widely  reported  by several media outlets, your party leader and flag bearer Dr Ismaila Ceesay expressed your party’s concerns and frustration in respect of matters surrounding the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) in the context of the forthcoming Presidential elections. It is fair to say that most of the concerns raised are mutual with the vast majority of the Gambian public and possibly non-Gambian observers. Your tenacity in holding the IEC accountable is commendable and it is the right thing to do.    You are absolutely right to emphasise and remind the IEC of its constitutional duty as the regulator and convening authority for all publicly mandated elections. Against the backdrop of what seems a very disorganised, ill-prepared IEC and an incumbent which increasingly gives the impression that it wishes to exploit such vulnerability, your party leader’s message could not have come at a better

REJOINDER | Response to Mai Fatty’s Comments on Draft Constitution Published on Standard Newspaper on 12 October 2020

Rejoinder: ‘Christians’ complaints over draft should be taken seriously’   By Pa Louis Sambou  Having come across the above captioned article which was published on  Standard newspaper on 12 October 2020 , I have reason to address a few fundamental inaccuracies, inaccuracies which I shall interrogate in the full knowledge that I will yet again attract more pathetic allegations from fellow citizens of “inventing prejudice”, fellow citizens some of whom unfortunately and ironically self – identify as ‘human rights’ activists. I never thought I’d ever have to say this but, the uncomfortable truth is, the spectacular unveiling of closet bigots among us (Gambians) is about the only good thing to show for the over D116 million investment on the now historical draft Constitution.    The article in question quoted Mr Mai Fatty as having said that:    “There is no provision in the draft Constitution that legally compels, mandates or subjects non-Muslims to sharia courts’ jurisdiction. Any imput

REJOINDER | Response to Mr Mai Fatty’s Claim that: ‘Plans to Resurrect Draft Without CRC are Unlawful’

  Rejoinder  –  ‘PLANS TO RESURRECT DRAFT WITHOUT CRC ARE UNLAWFUL’     By Pa Louis Sambou   Having read the above captioned article which was published in the  Standard Newspaper on 7 October 2020 , I thought it necessary to share my humble thoughts on the subject matter.    The above mentioned quoted Mr Mai Fatty as having said that:   “The CRC is the only legal entity that has the exclusive jurisdiction to review the 1997 Constitution and to draft a new one.  It remains relevant, and will not be set aside. Any deviation from this law by the State will be interpreted as the intention to create a custom-made draft from the desk of the Executive.”   I would humbly draw the attention of Mr Fatty to  section 22(1) of the CRC Act  which is what determines the extent of the CRC’s mandate. The implication of this provision is that the CRC “shall stand dissolved” one calendar month from the date the Promulgation Bill came to an end at the National Assembly. Therefore, as reaffirmed at paragr

REJOINDER | Unsolicited Response to DUGA, Right2Know, Team Gom-Sa-Bopa and Gambia Participates

Rejoinder  - ‘Open Letter to President Adama Barrow: Resubmit the Bill for a referendum and let the people decide’     By Pa Louis Sambou   Having read the above captioned publication by DUGA, Right2Know, Team Gom-Sa-Bopa and Gambia Participates    which was published on 2 October 2020, I thought it necessary to share a few thoughts.    It is perhaps a good idea to address a few myths before addressing the substantive issues:   The publication represents that “the majority of Gambians agreed in unison, that the 1997 Constitution, as it exists, is unfit for purpose given that it had been amended, and watered down 58 times…”   With such a bold claim, the only reason advanced by the author to substantiate such claim that the 1997 Constitution is “unfit for purpose” was that it had been “amended 58 times”. One would imagine that the author has a good grasp of the subject of which they speak and in which case it won’t be unreasonable to expect a much better substantiation of such claim than