The Fiscal Cliff: Understand It.

By Aroun Rashid Deen, New York City

If you live in Africa and have been following news on the United States lately, you may have heard the phrase 'fiscal cliff' or 'falling-off-the-fiscal-cliff.' You may not understand what this means. If so, this article is an effort to explain it, simply, and why you should be concerned. ‘Fiscal,’ according to The Associated Press Style Book, applies to budgetary matters. The Free Dictionary, describes ‘Cliff’ as a high, steep, or overhanging face of rock.
Fiscal cliff has a negative connotation in the United States. It’s used to describe a series of tax increases and budget cuts that are set to take effect simultaneously at the beginning of 2013. ‘Falling-off-the-cliff,’ is a term for the assumed economic problems that would occur should the two main political parties in the country, the Democrats, and the Republicans (also called the Grand Old Party or GOP), fail to reach agreement on a new tax plan before the beginning of the new year. Democrats are for tax increases for the rich, while Republicans want spending (budget) cuts. These two issues are key to this economic jargon.
During his presidency, George W. Bush introduced across-the-board tax cuts for almost all income earners, including the country’s wealthiest. The theory was that such tax breaks, particularly for the business community and the middle-class, would boost economic growth. The Bush tax breaks vary, depending on the kind of tax and the level of a tax payer’s income. The Democrats saw things differently. They believed that the Bush tax plan was meant to appease the wealthiest who, the Democrats claimed, will benefit from it more than low income earners. The Bush plan was to expire in 2010. However, when President Barack Obama took office, he reached a deal with the Republicans to extend the tax cuts plan until December 31 of this year.
Given that the United States, like other advanced nations, is facing its own financial crisis, the worst since the Great Depression, 1929 to 1941, and that the current U.S. national debt stands at $16.3 trillion, both the Democrats and Republicans have been looking at ways to at least reduce the debt and boost investments to help the economy. With the Bush cuts expiring, both parties saw an opportunity to push for adjustments they believe would help the economy and shrink the budget.

The Republicans believe that a major way forward is to reduce, drastically, government spending on domestic programs. The Democrats, on the other hand, want the new tax plan that would come into effect this January, to include the Bush tax breaks for lower income earners only, not for those making $400,000 and above. That’s compromise from their earlier target of $250,000.
The Democrats say that if the Republicans refuse a deal by December 31, tax rates for everyone, including those in the middle-class bracket will rise to pre-Bush levels. That would hurt economic growth because consumer spending will fall and in turn hurt other parts of the economy.
Obama and the Democrats also believe, that if the government cut ended domestic spending in such areas as military health care ($16 Billion annually), employment retirement program ($11 Billion), agricultural subsidies ($30 -36 Billion), food assistance ($4 Billion), home health care ($50 Billion), higher education ($10 Billion) and Social Security ($112 Billion), this will not only affect the middle-class but also will lead to massive job cuts in those areas.
The Republicans’ position was simply that raising tax rates on anyone, rich or not is not the way forward. They blame the country’s economic problems on excess spending by the government. However, like the Democrats, they too have so far given up some ground. They now say a new tax plan should target only those making above one million dollars.
The Bush-era tax cuts aren’t the only taxes that are scheduled to go up. A 2 percentage point cut in payroll taxes that employees pay is due to end. So are a series of business taxes. At the same time, government spending on domestic programs and the military would be cut drastically. While this would mean savings for the government, this combination could, according to many economists, eventually plunge the US into a recession because millions of jobs in the government and private companies would be lost. It would affect US military defense as well. Unless they reach a compromise by December 31st, America goes off the ‘fiscal cliff’!!

What does this mean to you?

It is no secret that the global economy, meaning that of almost every country of the world, including your home country in Africa is going through terrible times. Though the European Union has now replaced the US as the world’s biggest economy, it is, nonetheless, not as integrated as that of the US. The US economy is structured in such a way that it could withstand many of the challenges facing the EU, China and Japan and other countries. Take Germany, for example. It’s the EU's biggest economy and the only one that has not suffered because of the continent’s financial woes. Germany’s biggest consumer market is the US. Should the US fall off the fiscal cliff, it will significantly affect the German economy, and thus, the entire EU's, placing the EU in an even bigger financial mess. The same is true for China which is fast becoming Africa’s biggest trading partner. Again, the US is presently China’s biggest export market, according to a November 20, 2012 Agence France-Presse report, quoting China’s Commerce Ministry source. The report states that for the first 10 months of 2012, China's exports to the United States totaled $289.3 billion, while shipments to the EU came to $276.8 billion.

If the United States should fall off the cliff, it would mean fewer imports from China. This might force China to hold back on some of its dealings in Africa. Also, in order to make up for export revenues it would lose, China could raise the prices for essential items it exports elsewhere, such as medicines, foodstuffs and toiletries, to Africa. The outcome of this is that African countries would end up spending more for fewer imported items. You must know the math: the fewer the goods, the higher the prices. Again, if the government in your country provides subsidies on such items as petrol to food, it might stop doing do. Members of the public would have to pay more purchasing such items.

Although the effects of ‘falling off the cliff’ would not be felt immediately, they are, nonetheless, inevitable in the months that follow. So, as the saying goes in Europe, “when America sneezes, you catch the cold.”

Fight Against Impunity In the Gambia

Sierra Leone:SLPP REVERSES DECISION

(By Aroun Rashid Deen NYC)

The only opposition party in Sierra Leone, the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP), has reversed its decision that had ordered its lawmakers and local councilors to “stay away” from parliamentary and council proceedings.

The decision to reverse the call for a boycott was announced Thursday, December 6, following a meeting earlier in the week at State House between President Koroma and leaders of the SLPP, including Mr. Julius Bio, the party’s presidential candidate for the November 17, 2012, elections. An umbrella body of different denominations of the Christian faith, in Sierra Leone, the Body of Christ, had facilitated the meeting between the two groups in an effort to bring an end to what was becoming a political stalemate. The announcement on Thursday came about a week before the official opening of the new Parliament in the capital, Freetown, following national elections on November 17.

The party, on Tuesday, November 27, 2012, ordered the boycott, days after incumbent President, Ernest Koroma of the All People’s Congress (APC) Party, was declared the winner of the Presidential race. The SLPP had alleged election malpractices by the APC, despite an existing wide consensus among international observers that the elections were well conducted. The party had called on its deputies to stay away as a means of protest and also called for an external review of the whole electoral process. 42 SLPP MPs were elected in the poll.

SLPP’s National Secretary General, Suliaman Banja Tejan-Sie, who announced the party’s decision to rescind the planned boycott, said that in light of what he called government’s “commitment and assurance to address” their concerns, the party’s executive “direct its Members of Parliament, Mayors and Chairpersons and Councilors to take part in all Parliamentary and Local Council proceedings unless otherwise directed.”

Sources from Freetown suggest that elements within the leadership of the SLPP prevailed on the party to reconsider its stance and respond to the mediation efforts undertaken by the Body of Christ. Speculation was rife as to what was discussed when Mr. Bio and the President met privately, and rumors fueled both by the public, and the national press still persist.

This writer had argued a week ago, that the call for the boycott had little chance to hold. More so because the conduct of the election was deemed to have met internationally acceptable standards and the results recognized globally. Moreover, SLPP MPs, particularly first-timers, were, understandably, eager to get to work, as evident on Wednesday, December 5, when SLPP representatives attended a briefing session at Parliament Building, in Freetown.

The SLPP’s reversal of its call for a boycott will provide some welcome relief to the APC. Given the ruling party’s sweep in the Presidential and Parliamentary contests, it would be hard to ignore the chilling effect such a boycott would have on governance if not the entire democratic process.

One can speculate for a moment as to what next move by the SLPP will be. Certainly, the party will soon go back to the drawing board to evaluate its election’s strategies and its performance in this year’s elections, followed by what is likely to be early preparations for the next race in 2017.

It is perhaps too early to speculate meaningfully about the likely SLPP contestants for the party’s presidential ticket in 2017.  Clearly, Mr. Bio cannot be ruled out as a possibility. The 48-year-old would still be in his prime and would have presumably built upon the experience gained from the 2012 race.

For the APC, 2017 may prove to be more challenging. The likable and politically savvy Ernest Koroma will step down after completing his second term. Besides, the APC will likely find some difficulty selecting from among its crop of current leaders a natural successor or at least someone whose record  can match the President’s accomplishments after serving two terms in office.

Sierra Leone opposition party calls on lawmakers to boycott Parliament

By Aroun Rashid Deen


The Sierra Leone People’s Party, whose candidate, Julius Maada Bio, came
in a distant second to the incumbent President in a crowded field in the
just-concluded Sierra Leone presidential election, has called on its members
of parliament and other elected officials, to “stay away” from
parliamentary and all other local council proceedings.

A statement from the party’s secretariat issued Tuesday, just four days
after the National Electoral Commission NEC of Sierra Leone declared
incumbent President Ernest Koroma, of the All People’s Congress, the
winner of the presidential election held on November 17, stated that its
National Executive Committee strongly “condemns the refusal of the
National Electoral Commission (NEC) to address the electoral irregularities
including fake and unstamped Reconciliation and Result Forms, pre-marked
ballot papers, ballot stuffing and over-voting in Kono, the Western Area and
the Northern Province and more other instances of malpractices which
undermined the credibility of the results.” The party had hinted - just a
day after the result was announced - that it was going to contest the
presidential result, claiming electoral wrongdoings.

The SLPP national and local lawmakers are among the hundreds also elected
during the November 17 polling. Although the party has also – in a
separate statement - indicated that the elected officials have reaffirmed
their firm commitment to the resolution to stay away, pundits speculate that
few of them will adhere to their party’s call for the boycott. And if they
do, it will not be for long. Among them are first-timers, some of whom,
notwithstanding the party’s position regarding the results declared by the
NEC, are anxious to take up their seats for which they had worked hard, if
not to begin serving their constituents.

The call to stay away from parliamentary and other council proceedings may
be a signal that the SLPP is running out of options or strategies to reverse
the election result. In its press release, the party prevailed on the
international community to consider its claims of election fraud, demanding
“an independent international assessment” of the whole election process
involved, including the presidential result.

It is not clear which sector of the international community the SLPP wants
to intervene, since key players and leading decision makers in world
affairs, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Russia, the
United Nations, the European Union ECOWAS, the West African regional bloc
and the African Union, among others, have all recognized the election of
President Koroma. They have done so by way of statements of approval of the
election process and congratulatory messages to Koroma.

However, a reliable source from Freetown has indicated that frenetic
diplomatic efforts, led by the United Nations, are under way to bring
together President Ernest Bai Koroma and Julius Maada Bio, to find a
resolution to the SLPP’s alleged election fraud. It is not known what, if
anything, Mr. Bio would gain out of it, following his dismal performance,
other than to be coaxed to accept the election result. Representatives of
the two groups are to meet in Freetown shortly.

Further, in its press release, the party demanded the “unconditional
release” from police custody, those of its members and supporters who are
still being held. And in what it described as in the spirit of
reconciliation, the SLPP called on the government to “nolle prosequi all
pending political matters in our local courts.” It did not specify the
political matters in question nor indicate how the request is related to the
allegations of electoral fraud and irregularities.
Nolle prosequi is a term used in the context of the legal profession. It
means that either a prosecutor or plaintiff in a legal matter already in
proceeding has declared that he or she will not proceed any further.

Aroun Rashid Deen is a freelance journalist. He lives in New York City
646 645-1857

Sierra Leone Elections- U.S Congratulates Earnest Bai Koroma

(By Aroun Rashid Deen)

The United States government has congratulated Sierra Leone's President
Ernest Bai Koroma, following his reelection, noting the democratic progress
the country has made since the end of a civil war a decade. President Koroma
was re-elected to serve another five-year term in the West African nation.
White House spokesman, Jay Carney said in a statement: "The people of Sierra
Leone have made their voices heard."
Mr. Koroma of the ruling All People’s Congress, APC, was Saturday declared
the winner by the chairperson of the National Electoral Commission (NEC),
Christiana Thorpe, a week after voting on November 17th. The President
secured 58.7% of votes to defeat and avoid a run-off with his closest rival,
Julius Maada Bio, of the Sierra Leone People’s Party, SLPP. Bio got a mere
37.4% of votes during the November 17 polling. In Sierra Leone, the winning
candidate for the presidency must secure at least 55% of votes cast to avoid
a run-off. The election also included voting for parliamentary seats and
local council offices. Some 87.3% of the country’s electorate voted,
making it one of the highest recorded in the country’s national election
history.
The election itself was conducted peacefully, amid concerns about violence
due to heightened pre-election rhetoric, including sharp attacks on the
records of particularly Koroma and Bio, and incidents of violence in the
weeks preceding polling. Aside from the congratulatory statement from the
United States Government, international and local observers have described
the election as meeting the internationally-recognized threshold for
democratic elections.
UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, in a statement, commended the high voter
turnout and the remarkable calm displayed by the electorates during voting.
He maintained that that was a clear manifestation of Sierra Leoneans’
“desire for peace, democracy and development.”
The Head of the EU observer mission, Richard Howitt, in an earlier briefing,
said the election on Saturday, November 17, was well organized, smooth,
conducive to democratic consolidation and largely peaceful, though he
expressed concerns over what he regarded as financial bribery of paramount
chiefs by the APC. Paramount chiefs are traditional leaders who head their
various chiefdoms throughout the country. They maintain enormous influence
over their chiefdom subjects. Paramount Chiefs are supposed to remain
neutral during electioneering. The APC denied the allegation.
Another international observer group, the US-based Carter Center, in its
preliminary reports described the election process as peaceful, orderly,
transparent, and in general accordance with Sierra Leone’s legal framework
and obligations for democratic elections. Though the group raised concerns
over what it called some limited administrative shortcomings, it said that
NEC officials “performed admirably in difficult conditions, and that the
people of Sierra Leone turned out in high numbers to cast their ballots
freely.”
The West African regional bloc, the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS) also gave its stamp of approval to the election. It
described it as well conducted, and that the few isolated incidents of
irregularities do not affect the credibility of the entire process.
At the national level, the Political Parties Registration Commission (PPRC),
a group set up to monitor the activities of all registered parties for the
elections, commended the performances of both the parties and NEC for their
role during and after the November 17 poll. Its chairman, Justice Tolla
Thompson, said political parties conducted their affairs in a peaceful and
lawful matter that respected the Code of Conduct for Political Parties.
Nonetheless, Koroma’s main rival, Bio, and his SLPP party – prior to the
NEC’s announcement – had expressed concerns over what they saw as
wide-scale fraud by the APC in several polling centers in the northern
andwestern regions, and in the diamond-rich Kono, home to Vice President Sam
Sumana which is in the eastern region of the country.
NEC disputed much of the SLPP claims of fraud. Thorpe, in an earlier
statement suggested that evidence of such claims should be reported to the
police.
The SLPP has meanwhile indicated it intends to contest the results announced
by the NEC and Koroma’s re-election. In a radio broadcast, a day after the
result was announced, Mr. Bio alleged “electoral irregularities including
fake and unstamped Reconciliation and Result Forms, pre-marked ballot
papers, ballot stuffing and over-voting in Kono the Western Area and the
Northern Province....” He promised his party will soon contact members and
supporters on their official line of action. They can challenge the validity
of the election of the President by petitioning the Supreme Court of Sierra
Leone, but must do so within seven days following the NEC’s declaration.
President Koroma took the oath of office just hours after he was declared
the winner. He appealed for calm. He promised to work in the interest of all
Sierra Leone regardless of party affiliations. He also called on his former
opponents to join him “in moving the country forward.”
Umaru Fofana, a Sierra Leonean reporter for the BBC, and head of one of the
nation’s independent newspapers, Politico, said it appears the
President’s call for calm is being heeded. Fofana who drove around the
central and west end of Freetown after the announcement reported relatively
subdued celebrations in those areas. Freetown was one of the strongholds of
President Koroma.
With Bio being a former leader of the National Provisional Ruling Council
(NPRC) military junta that overthrew the APC from power in 1992, the APC was
more than determined not to have him unseat them from power again. With some
former members of the NPRC now members of the APC, Bio took the brunt of the
APC’s loathing of the junta he previously headed.
The dismal performance of the SLPP in this year’s elections stemmed from a
number of factors, chief of which were poor organization and leadership
going back to the start of their search for a possible presidential ticket.
Some, even within the hierarchy of the party believe Maada Bio was the wrong
choice at this time. The party has also been hampered with divisions within
its ranks, with some of its members, including some who vied for the
presidential nomination, jumping ship to the APC.
Bio’s poor performance has been the worst by the SLPP since 1996, when the
country was returned to democratic rule. It was Maada Bio himself, who, as
outgoing junta ruler, ushered in the Ahmad Tejan Kabbah-led SLPP government
that won the presidency that year. Tejan Kabbah secured 59.49% to beat his
run-off rival, John Karefa-Smart of the United National People’s Party.
Over 50% of the electorate voted in that election.
Kabbah was reelected in 2002 with a landslide of more than 70% of the votes,
beating then APC challenger, Ernest Koroma. Koroma quickly conceded defeat.
Five years later, in 2007, Ernest Koroma defeated then SLPP Vice President,
Solomon Berewa, 54.6% to 45.4%. Berewa, too, conceded defeat.
This year’s election was the third since the end of the country’s civil
war. However, it was the first organized by the country itself without the
help of the United Nations. The first two – conducted by the United
Nations – were held in 2002 and 2007 respectively. The admirable
performance of the electorate on November 17 was a reflection of what
happened in 2002 and 2007.
SLPP supporters are sure to grieve their loss. However, despite the tense
campaign bickering and acrimony that defined pre-election relations between
some of the supporters of both parties, the drive for national unity, peace
and progress is deep-seated in the cultural psyche of the ordinary citizen
in present-day Sierra Leone. One ardent SLPP supporter here in the United
States, Alimamy Rassin Kamara, in his courageous response to Koroma’s
wins, says: “We owe it to our country and the people to accept the results
for what they are and conduct ourselves in the most peaceful and law-abiding
way.”
It is expected that those feelings of despondency, and elation, on the part
of the winning side, will soon give way to one that puts the collective
interests of the nation above all else.

Aroun Rashid Deen is a freelance journalist. He lives in New York City
646 645-1857

SIERRA LEONE REELECT PRESIDENT KOROMA

(By Aroun Rashid Deen)
Sierra Leone’s incumbent President, Ernest Bai Koroma, has been re-elected
to serve another five-year term in the small West African nation. Mr. Koroma
of the ruling All People’s Congress, APC, was Saturday declared the winner
by the chairperson of the National Electoral Commission (NEC), Christiana
Thorpe, a week after voting on November 17th. The President secured 58.7% of
votes to defeat and avoid a run-off with his closest rival, Julius Maada
Bio, of the Sierra Leone People’s Party, SLPP. Bio got a mere 37.4% of
votes during the November 17 polling. In Sierra Leone, the winning candidate
for the presidency must secure at least 55% of votes cast to avoid a
run-off. The election also included voting for parliamentary seats and local
council offices. Some 87.3% of the country’s electorate voted, making it
one of the highest recorded in the country’s national election history.
The election itself was conducted peacefully, amid concerns about violence
due to heightened pre-election rhetoric, including sharp attacks on the
records of particularly Koroma and Bio, and incidents of violence in the
weeks preceding polling. International and local observers have described
the election as meeting the internationally-recognized threshold for
democratic elections.
UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, in a statement, commended the high voter
turnout and the remarkable calm displayed by the electorates during voting.
He maintained that that was a clear manifestation of Sierra Leoneans’
“desire for peace, democracy and development.”
The Head of the EU observer mission, Richard Howitt, in an earlier briefing,
said the election on Saturday, November 17, was well organized, smooth,
conducive to democratic consolidation and largely peaceful, though he
expressed concerns over what he regarded as financial bribery of paramount
chiefs by the APC. Paramount chiefs are traditional leaders who head their
various chiefdoms throughout the country. They maintain enormous influence
over their chiefdom subjects. Paramount Chiefs are supposed to remain
neutral during electioneering. The APC denied the allegation.
Another international observer group, the US-based Carter Center, in its
preliminary reports described the election process as peaceful, orderly,
transparent, and in general accordance with Sierra Leone’s legal framework
and obligations for democratic elections. Though the group raised concerns
over what it called some limited administrative shortcomings, it said that
NEC officials “performed admirably in difficult conditions, and that the
people of Sierra Leone turned out in high numbers to cast their ballots
freely.”
The West African regional bloc, the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS) also gave its stamp of approval to the election. It
described it as well conducted, and that the few isolated incidents of
irregularities do not affect the credibility of the entire process.
At the national level, the Political Parties Registration Commission (PPRC),
a group set up to monitor the activities of all registered parties for the
elections, commended the performances of both the parties and NEC for their
role during and after the November 17 poll. Its chairman, Justice Tolla
Thompson, said political parties conducted their affairs in a peaceful and
lawful matter that respected the Code of Conduct for Political Parties.
Nonetheless, Koroma’s main rival, Bio, and his SLPP party – prior to the
NEC’s announcement – had expressed concerns over what they saw as
wide-scale fraud by the APC in several polling centers in the northern and
western regions, and in the diamond-rich Kono, home to Vice President Sam
Sumana which is in the eastern region of the country.
NEC disputed much of the SLPP claims of fraud. Thorpe, in an earlier
statement suggested that evidence of such claims should be reported to the
police.
The SLPP has meanwhile indicated it intends to contest the results announced
by the NEC and Koroma’s re-election. In a radio broadcast, a day after the
result was announced, Mr. Bio alleged “electoral irregularities including
fake and unstamped Reconciliation and Result Forms, pre-marked ballot
papers, ballot stuffing and over-voting in Kono the Western Area and the
Northern Province....” He promised his party will soon contact members and
supporters on their official line of action. They can challenge the validity
of the election of the President by petitioning the Supreme Court of Sierra
Leone, but must do so within seven days following the NEC’s declaration.
President Koroma took the oath of office just hours after he was declared
the winner. He appealed for calm. He promised to work in the interest of all
Sierra Leone regardless of party affiliations. He also called on his former
opponents to join him “in moving the country forward.”
Umaru Fofana, a Sierra Leonean reporter for the BBC, and head of one of the
nation’s independent newspapers, Politico, said it appears the
President’s call for calm is being heeded. Fofana who drove around the
central and west end of Freetown after the announcement reported relatively
subdued celebrations in those areas. Freetown was one of the strongholds of
President Koroma.
With Bio being a former leader of the National Provisional Ruling Council
(NPRC) military junta that overthrew the APC from power in 1992, the APC was
more than determined not to have him unseat them from power again. With some
former members of the NPRC now members of the APC, Bio took the brunt of the
APC’s loathing of the junta he previously headed.
The dismal performance of the SLPP in this year’s elections stemmed from a
number of factors, chief of which were poor organization and leadership
going back to the start of their search for a possible presidential ticket.
Some, even within the hierarchy of the party believe Maada Bio was the wrong
choice at this time. The party has also been hampered with divisions within
its ranks, with some of its members, including some who vied for the
presidential nomination, jumping ship to the APC.
Bio’s poor performance has been the worst by the SLPP since 1996, when the
country was returned to democratic rule. It was Maada Bio himself, who, as
outgoing junta ruler, ushered in the Ahmad Tejan Kabbah-led SLPP government
that won the presidency that year. Tejan Kabbah secured 59.49% to beat his
run-off rival, John Karefa-Smart of the United National People’s Party.
Over 50% of the electorate voted in that election.
Kabbah was reelected in 2002 with a landslide of more than 70% of the votes,
beating then APC challenger, Ernest Koroma. Koroma quickly conceded defeat.
Five years later, in 2007, Ernest Koroma defeated then SLPP Vice President,
Solomon Berewa, 54.6% to 45.4%. Berewa, too, conceded defeat.
This year’s election was the third since the end of the country’s civil
war. However, it was the first organized by the country itself without the
help of the United Nations. The first two – conducted by the United
Nations – were held in 2002 and 2007 respectively. The admirable
performance of the electorate on November 17 was a reflection of what
happened in 2002 and 2007.
SLPP supporters are sure to grieve their loss. However, despite the tense
campaign bickering and acrimony that defined pre-election relations between
some of the supporters of both parties, the drive for national unity, peace
and progress is deep-seated in the cultural psyche of the ordinary citizen
in present-day Sierra Leone. One ardent SLPP supporter here in the United
States, Alimamy Rassin Kamara, in his courageous response to Koroma’s
wins, says: “We owe it to our country and the people to accept the results
for what they are and conduct ourselves in the most peaceful and law-abiding
way.”
It is expected that those feelings of despondency and elation, on the part
of the winning side, will soon give way to one that puts the collective
interests of the nation above all else.

Aroun Rashid Deen is a freelance journalist. He lives in New York City
646 645-1857

Gambia:The National Transitional Council Gambia sets up Government In Exile

Source :The Gambia News


The Gambian National Transitional Council, headed by one Sidia Bayo held a press conference this morning in the French capital Paris. According to the statement received , the CNTG  has given Yaya Jammeh 30 days to vacate power and has also published a list of names as  ministers in next transitional government. Listed Below are the names of persons chosen by the National Transitional Council.

President and commander in chief of The Gambia Armed Forces, 
Minister of Natural Resources and Energy: 
Mr Bayo Sidia Sheikh 
  

General Secretary Office of the President: Mr Ousman Jammeh 
  
  
Vice President and head of Government: Mr Jallow Babucarr 

  
Minister of Defence : Mr Mohamed Kora 
  
Minister of Interior and Home Affairs: Mr Sanyang Ablaye 
  
Minister of Justice, Equalities, National Religious affairs and reconciliation 
Lawyer Darboe Yankuba (spokesman) 
  
Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs: Mr Touray Suntu 
  
Minister of Agriculture and food production; Mr. Falai Baldeh 
  
Minister of Youths and Sports: Mr Sada Njie 
  
Minister of Tourism and Culture: Mr Landing Nyassi 
  
Minister of Media and Communications: Mr Bamba Serign Mass (spokesman) 
  
Minister of Local Governments and Lands: Mr Mahawa Cham 
  
Minister of Health, Social Welfare and Women’s Affairs: Mrs. Sarata Jabbi 
  
Minister of Foreign Affairs: Mr Darboe Manding 
  
Minister of Basic and Secondary Education: Mr Alajie Nyabally 
  
Minister of Forestry and Environment: Mr Abdul Karim Sanneh 

Source: http://thegambianews.eu

The Gambia Report On Human Rights Practices 2011 by U.S State Department

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Gambia is a multiparty democratic republic. On November 25, voters reelected President Alhaji Yahya Jammeh to a fourth term in a peaceful, orderly election that was neither free nor fair. President Jammeh’s party, the Alliance for Patriotic Reorientation and Construction (APRC), continued to dominate the political landscape. There were instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently of civilian control.

The Gambia continues downward slide on governance ladder

By D. A. Jawo

It is indeed hard for any right thinking Gambian to imagine why President Yahya Jammeh, who is already under intense local and international scrutiny over his unwise decision to execute nine death row prisoners under very cloudy circumstances, would yet still go ahead to arbitrarily close down media houses simply for not singing his praises. Any reasonable person would have thought that under the circumstances that he presently finds himself in, he would have done everything possible to deflect rather than attract more negative attention on his regime.The arbitrary decision to send NIA operatives to both The Daily News and The Standard on Friday afternoon and verbally ask them to immediately cease publication, without any court order or yet still without any document to that effect, tantamount to the worst form of arbitrariness ever seen in a country that claims to be practicing modern  democracy. That was exactly what they did to the Gambia’s most popular radio station, Teranga FM, about three weeks ago.

This action by the Gambian authorities and the crude manner it was done shows how far down the governance ladder this country has degenerated and the almost total lack of adherence to the most basic tenets of the rule of law being practiced by those in authority.  It is hard to understand how in this 21st century, any government can just send people to legally registered media outlets and verbally ask them to cease operations without any legal document to that effect. This is indeed the height of arbitrariness ever witnessed in our sub-region, and a clear manifestation of the almost total lack of regard for the welfare of ordinary Gambians.

It is now quite evident that such arbitrariness and lack of regard for the rule of law has become a daily occurrence in The Gambia, often done in complete disregard of the provisions of the law and natural justice. Just a few days prior to the arbitrary closure of The Daily News and The Standard, for instance, we had seen how two journalists were detained for more than the legal limit of 72 hours for merely applying for a police permit to demonstrate, which is quite a normal occurrence in any civilized society.
As if that was not enough violation of the law, we were also told that rather than going through the legal channels of arresting and detaining them, the two journalists were tricked into reporting to the police station when they were told that their application for permit had been approved and that they were required to report to the police for it, only to be detained when they went to report.  It is hard to imagine that a responsible government would be engaged in such amateurish behavior.

We are also told that the police had to search the homes of those two journalists, no doubt without any search warrants, and that they even had to break open the door to the room of a brother of one of the journalists, which is not only illegal but tantamount to burglary, which would have been a big scandal in any civilized society.

While the arbitrary closure of Teranga FM, The Daily News and The Standard seems to have robbed the masses of ordinary Gambians their most reliable sources of news and information, it has also rendered several people out of employment.  It is quite hard to justify the decision by this regime, which makes so much noise about its concern for the welfare of Gambians, to use their arbitrary powers to close down media houses which action has suddenly rendered so many Gambians unemployed without any justifiable reasons.
The question on everyone’s lips is whether President Jammeh indeed has any advisers or whether he listens to any advice. He does not seem to know that by using arbitrary powers to close down genuinely registered media houses, he is forcing more and more Gambians to turn to the online publications for news and information about The Gambia. There is no way that he can force Gambians to consume lock, stock and barrel the propaganda and deception being churned on a daily basis by the GRTS and his other propaganda outlets when they can easily get the correct information from other sources.
Therefore, by using arbitrary powers to deny them access to the correct information through the local media outlets, Gambians will now resort to the online media and other sources to get the information they need and there is nothing the government can do about it. We have certainly passed that stage in our country’s development when the regime can determine for the people what information they should consume as if the regime is dealing with robots.

We have all heard the defensive posture adopted by members of the regime in the aftermath of the prisoner executions, with the Attorney General even saying that he would resign if anyone showed him any errors in the way and manner the executions were carried out. However, it is hard to see how anyone can prove to him the illegality of the executions when his regime has clearly shown that they have no tolerance for divergent views and opinion. We are however now waiting to see how he and all those who were making such noises would react to this arbitrariness and lack of adherence to the basic rule of law to close down these media houses. As the legal adviser to the government, this arbitrary and illegal action is enough reason for him to resign if it is not reversed; otherwise, his own credibility as a legal luminary is at stake.

It is therefore quite an embarrassment to most Gambians to see our once peaceful dear country rapidly slide down to a bastion of mal-governance with little regard for the rule of law, and gradually transformed into the laughing stock of the sub-region.
Another big embarrassment to most Gambians is the submissive behavior of our traditional and religious leaders, who are always in a haste to rally round the regime’s actions without regard to the wishes and aspirations of the overwhelming majority of the people, apparently in return for the crumbs and other generous gifts that President Jammeh often lavishes on them on such occasions like Ramadan and similar events. Therefore, until our religious leaders, in particular, muster the courage to tell President Jammeh the truth, in accordance with their religious mandate, this country’s governance profile will continue its downward slide.

Opinion:No light at the end of the tunnel of fear in the Gambia

Extrajudicial executions betray its commitment to human rights

Alagi Yorro Jallow

NEW YORK — In the Gambia, there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel of fear. Recent extrajudicial executions, nocturnal killings and beatings have reinforced the powerlessness of the population to fight and expose corruption and other heinous acts.

In this tiny country, democracy takes one step forward, one step back. What can we do? And what can the international community do to rescue the Gambia from chaos?Last April and May, the Gambia was host to the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights where the country’s position as an advocate for human rights was on display. Soon afterward, the government brazenly contradicted its position through extrajudicial executions in a tragic betrayal of the Gambia’s international obligations.

The Gambia is the custodian of the African Commission not only because the African Charter had been adopted in Banjul and is now headquartered there but because the Gambia’s adherence to international political and human rights norms was seen, at the time, as exemplary. It was thought that this would ensure the Gambia as a good place to serve as headquarters to both the charter and commission.

In accepting the invitation to host the African Commission, the Gambian government agreed to guarantee the conditions and sustain an environment that would enable the norms and values of human rights and democracy to flourish.

Unfortunately, Gambia is not a place where democracy and human rights are upheld. Over the years, President Yahya Jammeh has become ever more dictatorial—some might even say, crazy. DeWayne Wickham, a columnist for USA Today, rightly pointed out that “Yahya Jammeh could well be Africa’s biggest psychopath.” Jammeh’s regime currently has 47 people on death row, and dozens serving life sentences. Officials confirmed the execution of nine inmates on August 24, the first in the Gambia since 1985. Although Gambia reinstated the death penalty in 1995, shortly after Jammeh took power in a military coup, no prisoners are believed to have been executed until recently.

The nine prisoners were reportedly dragged from their prison cells without warning. They were not allowed to say good-bye or given the opportunity to have their last meals and prayers. They were lined up and shot by a firing squad; and now the remaining 38 are at risk of the same fate.

Family members claim they were not aware of the executions until they heard the news broadcasts. They do not know when the killings took place, how they were killed, where they are buried and whether they were buried according to Islamic rites.

Speaking in a televised broadcast to mark the Muslim festival of EID, Jammeh said, “All those guilty of serious crimes and who are condemned will face the full force of the law. All punishments prescribed by law will be maintained in the country to ensure that criminals get what they deserve; that is, those who killed are killed—by the middle of next month, all the death sentences will have been carried out to the letter.” Jammeh vowed to execute them, and swore that, if they were not executed, he would “drink alcohol and eat pork,” in violation of Islamic law.

In the days that followed 18 were killed in a second round of brutal executions. President Jammeh had announced during August that all prisoners on death row would be executed by mid-September to tackle a rising crime rate and to dissuade people from committing “heinous crimes.”

Before Jammeh’s takeover, the Gambia was viewed as an “exception” on a continent where authoritarianism and military regimes have been the norm since the colonies gained independence. Apart from an aborted coup in 1981, the Gambia had enjoyed relative peace and stability since it attained independence in 1965. Unfortunately, all of that changed in July 1994, after the coup led by Jammeh. Most Gambians genuinely fear the 45-year-old autocrat, and there is little opposition to him.

Jammeh’s government has tortured and killed journalists and forced into exile those who dared criticize him. He has cowed the rest into self-censorship. The Gambia’s prisons are filled with political prisoners, and rivals to the regime often disappear or turn up mysteriously dead in the night.

With the recent executions, we find ourselves asking anew: Is it possible to act courageously as a citizen in the Gambia today? Perhaps, although it is surely true that our experiences have taught us that there are limits to what Gambians are able to endure, especially when we are not able to truly speak out against the madness and anarchy that prevail. As years of intimidation build, stress finds less and less relief as every possible effort to push on, report and publish is exhausted. And when, time and time again, those efforts are foiled by government intervention, when personal safety is threatened, perhaps only the courage to seek another way, from another place, can become the force of change. Until that time there is little hope; no light at the end of the tunnel of fear.

Alagi Yorro Jallow is the founding managing editor of the banned newspaper, Independent, in the Gambia. He was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University and holds a masters degree from Harvard’s Kennedy