 Mauritanian Anti-Slavery Activist Brahim Bilal The Mauritanian authorities must release three activists - including a prominent opposition politician - jailed today for holding anti-slavery rallies, Amnesty International said. Police used tear gas and batons to disperse the protestors in front of the court who were demonstrating against the judgment. The court in the southern town of Rosso handed down two-year sentences to three anti-slavery activists and human rights defenders, Brahim Bilal, Djiby Sow and Biram Ould Dah Ould Abeid, a former presidential candidate. They have been convicted of membership of an unrecognized organization and of taking part in an unauthorized assembly. Seven other activists were acquitted. “The conviction of these activists for taking part in peaceful protests on charges which are vague and open to abuse violates their human rights to free expression and freedom of peaceful assembly,’’ said Gaetan Mootoo, Amnesty International West Africa Researcher. “The failure to obtain a permit for a peaceful assembly should never be the basis for imprisonment. Their conviction appears to be politically motivated with members of the group targeted on account of their peaceful activism. The authorities should take immediate steps to release them while their appeal is pending.” Biram Ould Dah Ould Abeid is the President of the Initiative for the Resurgence of the Abolitionist Movement (IRA) and was the runner-up in June’s presidential elections. He also won the UN Human Rights Prize in 2013. He was arrested in Rosso on 11 November, along with 10 other IRA members during their peaceful campaign to raise awareness about land rights for people of slave descent (land slavery). In Mauritania, slave descendants who work on land without any rights are forced to give a portion of crops to their traditional masters. Police stopped the meeting citing the absence of any authorization documents, despite the IRA having requested them. The group were charged on 15 November and detained in Rosso without being allowed family visits. “The intensifying crackdown on anti-slavery activists in Mauritania has no legal justification and is symptomatic of the government’s lack of respect for human rights,” said Gaetan Mootoo, Amnesty International’s West Africa Researcher. “The authorities must respect the right of all citizens to demonstrate peacefully.’’ |
Thursday, 15 January 2015
Jailed presidential candidate and anti-slavery activists must be released
Monday, 12 January 2015
Gambian Dictator Jammeh says ‘I am Sorry’
Gambian President Yahya Jammeh apologised to former colonial master Britain on Sunday for saying its nationals were involved in a failed coup attempt last month.
Gunmen attempted to storm the presidential palace in the beachside capital of the West African nation overnight on Dec. 30 while Jammeh was abroad, but were repelled by guards.
In the immediate aftermath of the coup, Jammeh accused foreign-backed dissidents in Britain, the United States and Germany of mounting the attack.
However, on Sunday he withdrew the reference to Britons. 
“So far there is not a single Gambian or dissidents from Britain who came to join to them (the coup plotters); so I am very sorry,” Jammeh said on Monday in a speech before the armed forces near his palace.
Prosecutors in the United States have charged a Texas businessman with bankrolling and trying to lead the coup with the support of a former U.S. Army sergeant. No details of any German involvement in the coup have emerged so far.
Gambia, whose borders are fabled to have been fixed by cannonballs fired from a British warship on the eponymous river, is a popular destination for European tourists.
But despite the economic ties, 49-year-old Jammeh, who seized power in a 1994 coup, faces growing Western pressure over alleged human rights abuses.
In an apparent jab at the former coloniser, Jammeh said in the same speech: “If God says so I will be very happy to rule Britain. After all they ruled us, so if I can rule them; if Gambia can rule them, that will be the biggest gift.”
Jammeh, who typically wears a large white African tunic called a boubou and carries prayer beads, has earned a reputation in the West for colourful speeches.
He once claimed publicly to have personally found a cure for AIDS and told the BBC that he would rule for “a billion years”.
http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFKBN0KL0CP20150112?sp=true
Saturday, 10 January 2015
“Neither Military Nor Cabinet Said A Word”
Below is Halifa Sallah’s statement on the attempted coup.
PDOIS ON THE ARMED INSURRECTION
PDOIS STATEMENT ON THE 30TH DECEMBER 2014 ARMED INSURRECTION
ISSUED BY HALIFA SALLAH ON BEHALF OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE 4TH January 2015
ISSUED BY HALIFA SALLAH ON BEHALF OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE 4TH January 2015
NEITHER THE BALLOT NOR THE BULLET CHANGED THE FIRST REPUBLIC FOR 30 YEARS
NEITHER THE BALLOT NOR THE BULLET HAS CHANGED THE SECOND REPUBLIC FOR 20 YEARS
HOW TO PREVENT HISTORY FROM REPEATING ITSELF?
NEITHER THE BALLOT NOR THE BULLET HAS CHANGED THE SECOND REPUBLIC FOR 20 YEARS
HOW TO PREVENT HISTORY FROM REPEATING ITSELF?
On 30th December 2014 the people within the vicinity of Banjul woke up to the sound of firing of weapons during the early hours of the morning. The PDOIS leadership, through information passed on to Foroyaa while the firing was taking place, was alerted to the prevailing developments. It was not clear who the insurgents were.
During the early hours of the morning it became clear from the soldiers who were in control of Independence drive and who were asking the residents to stay indoors that the loyalist forces were in control of the state house and the City. This was not evident to many people in the country. Hence the rumours spread that a coup had taken place and that the state house had been taken over by the coup makers.
During the early hours of the morning it became clear from the soldiers who were in control of Independence drive and who were asking the residents to stay indoors that the loyalist forces were in control of the state house and the City. This was not evident to many people in the country. Hence the rumours spread that a coup had taken place and that the state house had been taken over by the coup makers.
In the morning, Banjul was sealed by the loyalist forces. One could not get in or move out of Banjul.
We expected to hear a comment from the Vice President over the National media but none came. Since the President travels without proclaiming in the Gazette the appointment of an Acting President we monitored the international media to find out where he was and what he had to say. No direct statement came from the executive in those decisive hours.
In the same vein, no organised insurgency takes place without a spokesperson issuing a statement regarding the objective of their mission during the time of combat. We monitored the airwaves but received no information from the insurgents regarding their mission.
In the same vein, no organised insurgency takes place without a spokesperson issuing a statement regarding the objective of their mission during the time of combat. We monitored the airwaves but received no information from the insurgents regarding their mission.
The public was completely kept in the dark, both by the state and the insurgents. They did not know what and what not to believe.
Banks and other businesses were closed in Banjul and KMC, even though no state of emergency was declared. All businesses and social activity in the city came to a halt. Rumours grew wings in the countryside and abroad.
To satisfy ourselves regarding the military and security situation we monitored all security and military activities throughout the country and came to the conclusion that there was no state of alert anywhere else other than Banjul and to a small extent, Farafenni camp.
News began to come out in drips on the nature of the insurgency and the profile of the Combatants. The name of Lt. Col. Lamin Sanneh, a former state guard Commander, featured prominently as the leader of the insurgents. Four people were reported to have been killed and one injured. It was also rumoured that they were mainly ex military men who were resident in the US and the UK.
As people and transports began to move freely in places other than Banjul it was apparent that the insurgency was history and what was necessary was to know the details and the implications for the executive, in particular and the people at large.
NEITHER THE MILITARY NOR THE CABINET SAID A WORD
Even though the insurgency was contained during the early hours of the morning, the officials were completely silent in the morning of the 30th of December. This gave rise to suspense in the public view of things. The contradictory information regarding the whereabouts of the President without any statement issued by the state media regarding his coming made some to believe that the insurgents were in control of State House. It is therefore no surprise why some online media continued to drum up support for the insurgents and called on the population to come to their support.
Even though the insurgency was contained during the early hours of the morning, the officials were completely silent in the morning of the 30th of December. This gave rise to suspense in the public view of things. The contradictory information regarding the whereabouts of the President without any statement issued by the state media regarding his coming made some to believe that the insurgents were in control of State House. It is therefore no surprise why some online media continued to drum up support for the insurgents and called on the population to come to their support.
The whole morning of 30th December 2014 was devoted to speculation by many. It was not clear to most whether the insurgency had succeeded or failed. The Gambia became a Nation of citizens in the waiting, not knowing what would come next.
Apparently, by 1PM someone within the state apparatus considered it prudent to issue a statement to claim that the insurgency was contained and that people should go about their business. The public was more interested in knowing about the whereabouts of the President. Without his appearance on Gambian soil, few could be convinced that the insurgency had been defeated.
The information vacuum which followed the 1PM News increased the anxiety of the population and attracted the curiosity of the international media. They conducted many interviews which did not touch on the true state of affairs in the country and could not give an accurate picture of events as they were at their moment of happening.
The information vacuum which followed the 1PM News increased the anxiety of the population and attracted the curiosity of the international media. They conducted many interviews which did not touch on the true state of affairs in the country and could not give an accurate picture of events as they were at their moment of happening.
Night fell on the 30th of December leaving the people of the Gambia with an uneasy feeling regarding the ultimate consequences of events. Even though it was announced that people could go about their normal business, the people of Banjul who were grounded in their homes did not know whether the fighting had come to an end and why their movement was being restricted.
WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THE COUNRTY?
The fact that the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic was completely cut off from his troops, and had no constitutionally appointed person acting in his place raised many questions as to who was in charge of the country before the President’s return. Was it the Vice President or the Chief of Defense staff who was in charge? The constitutional implications are overwhelming, thus begging the question whether a president should leave the country without appointing an Acting President.
The fact that the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic was completely cut off from his troops, and had no constitutionally appointed person acting in his place raised many questions as to who was in charge of the country before the President’s return. Was it the Vice President or the Chief of Defense staff who was in charge? The constitutional implications are overwhelming, thus begging the question whether a president should leave the country without appointing an Acting President.
On 31st December, at about 1AM, we received information that a motorcade moving with rapid speed without siren had passed and was moving towards Banjul. The 1PM news indicated the presence of the President in the country and conveyed his New-Year message.
In the afternoon, some claimed that they had seen his motorcade in town. In the evening of 31st December, 2014, the President delivered his New Year Message which made no reference to the incident.
In the afternoon, some claimed that they had seen his motorcade in town. In the evening of 31st December, 2014, the President delivered his New Year Message which made no reference to the incident.
PUTTING THE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE TOGETHER
On 1st January, 2015, in an interview over the national media, the President displayed the sophisticated automatic weapons and explosives which had been smuggled into the country? He accused the US and the UK of complicity with the insurgents.
On 1st January, 2015, in an interview over the national media, the President displayed the sophisticated automatic weapons and explosives which had been smuggled into the country? He accused the US and the UK of complicity with the insurgents.
According to reports, a captured insurgent had led the intelligence officers to a container smuggled into The Gambia and the contents disguised as second hand clothing.
THE END RESULT
Three of the leaders are confirmed dead, namely, Ex Lt Colonel Lamin Sanneh, Njagga Jagne and Alhaji Nyassi. Hence the insurgency cannot be given any tribal connotation.
Three of the leaders are confirmed dead, namely, Ex Lt Colonel Lamin Sanneh, Njagga Jagne and Alhaji Nyassi. Hence the insurgency cannot be given any tribal connotation.
There are varying reports on the number of people captured and those who fled to Guinea Bissau or back to the US.
The UN, the US and Senegal condemned the armed insurgency and it is understood that charges have been preferred against Cherno Njie and Papa Faal for allegedly smuggling arms into the Gambia and participating in the armed attack. It is claimed that Cherno Njie would have been the interim President.
RESTORING THE AUTHORITY OF THE EXECUTIVE
Solidarity marches were being organised. It first started with the law enforcement, security and military units. This was followed by that of the public servants, the National Assembly members and other sympathisers.
Solidarity marches were being organised. It first started with the law enforcement, security and military units. This was followed by that of the public servants, the National Assembly members and other sympathisers.
CONTRADICTORY SIGNALS
Check points were relaxed and then restored in Banjul, Kanifing, Essau and Soma. The arrests of family members of suspects erode the trend towards a semblance of normalcy. The Stone Age doctrine of collective punishment based on blood ties undermines justice and entrenches impunity.
Check points were relaxed and then restored in Banjul, Kanifing, Essau and Soma. The arrests of family members of suspects erode the trend towards a semblance of normalcy. The Stone Age doctrine of collective punishment based on blood ties undermines justice and entrenches impunity.
THE LESSONS
THE HAZARDS OF THE PRESIDENCY
If a President of the US could be assassinated, then no president in the world is immune to assassination. Suffice it to say , a President depends entirely on the security and military apparatus of a state for personal security. A coup d’etat occurs when the security forces which protect the power of the executive turn against it and deny it protection. In that case the executive has to flee to seek asylum. In sophisticated armies where there are well defined command and control structures, no coup could occur unless the majority of battalion, platoon and company commanders are in agreement. In the same vein, there are two poles of power in a Sovereign Republic, that is, the power of the state and that of the people. A people could rise up against an executive and leave the security apparatus with no option but to commit genocide or turn against the executive.
THE HAZARDS OF THE PRESIDENCY
If a President of the US could be assassinated, then no president in the world is immune to assassination. Suffice it to say , a President depends entirely on the security and military apparatus of a state for personal security. A coup d’etat occurs when the security forces which protect the power of the executive turn against it and deny it protection. In that case the executive has to flee to seek asylum. In sophisticated armies where there are well defined command and control structures, no coup could occur unless the majority of battalion, platoon and company commanders are in agreement. In the same vein, there are two poles of power in a Sovereign Republic, that is, the power of the state and that of the people. A people could rise up against an executive and leave the security apparatus with no option but to commit genocide or turn against the executive.
Hence, the ways and means to reduce the hazards of the presidency is to derive authority from the will of the people and exercise that authority to promote their welfare and ensure that the military and security establishments are protective of the people.
HOW DID THE INSURGENTS HOPE TO EFFECT CHANGE?
In classic military science, insurgency could only hope to be successful if linked to mass uprising, or mass desertion and disintegration of the regular army. In the case of the 30th December insurgency, the public was completely out of the picture and there was no sign that the regular army had experienced any mass desertion in favour of the insurgency.
In classic military science, insurgency could only hope to be successful if linked to mass uprising, or mass desertion and disintegration of the regular army. In the case of the 30th December insurgency, the public was completely out of the picture and there was no sign that the regular army had experienced any mass desertion in favour of the insurgency.
It is therefore possible that the insurgents miscalculated in thinking that once they struck, there would be spontaneous desertion from the regular army. The Farafenni attackers suffered the same fate. They took over the Farafenni camp and maintained it for a long period of time, hoping that the youth of Baddibu, which was then seen as an opposition stronghold, would join them and receive quick training to take control of the weapons. They ended up having weapons under their control without fighters to carry the arms. They had to ultimately flee without achieving their mission. The 30th December insurgency suffered the same fate.
THE WAY FORWARD
First and foremost, magnanimity is expected from the side of the state rather than revenge. A coroner’s inquest is expected to handle the case of the insurgents who have been killed and their bodies given to their families for burial.
First and foremost, magnanimity is expected from the side of the state rather than revenge. A coroner’s inquest is expected to handle the case of the insurgents who have been killed and their bodies given to their families for burial.
Family members who are arrested should be released. There should be no purging or arrest of family members.
Gambians abroad and at home need to go back to the drawing board and debate on the way forward for the country. How then are we to avoid a repetition of history?
Gambians abroad and at home need to go back to the drawing board and debate on the way forward for the country. How then are we to avoid a repetition of history?
HOW TO AVOID A REPETITION OF HISTORY
A crisis may be defused or inflamed. The best way to defuse a crisis is to engage in impact assessment and manage its after effects. The larger the impact on the larger society and the more people are drawn into the crisis the more difficult its management and containment becomes. This is why international standards are established in restricting accountability to those who are the architects of events and who bear the greatest responsibility for its perpetration and outcome.
Hence the executive and its agents should not involve those who are circumstantially connected with the event of 30th December 2014. They should focus on the epicentre rather than the periphery.
A crisis may be defused or inflamed. The best way to defuse a crisis is to engage in impact assessment and manage its after effects. The larger the impact on the larger society and the more people are drawn into the crisis the more difficult its management and containment becomes. This is why international standards are established in restricting accountability to those who are the architects of events and who bear the greatest responsibility for its perpetration and outcome.
Hence the executive and its agents should not involve those who are circumstantially connected with the event of 30th December 2014. They should focus on the epicentre rather than the periphery.
Since no state of emergency is declared no one should be detained for more than 72 hours without being charged or released. This is the mature way of dealing with the issue without resorting to impunity which nurtures more desperation and impunity on the side of victims.
DEFINING MOMENT FOR THE NATION
What has happened should compel the state and the people to take stock.
It should be clear to all that power in a sovereign Republic lies in the military and security apparatus, on one hand and the people, on the other. The Regular army and security forces do not constitute a homogenous group. They are made of people with diverse interests who are bound by command and control structures and who do not easily capitulate during a surprise attack from outside of their ranks. Soldiers break out of these command control structures to carry out mutinies at great risks when they have their own grievances. Most mutinies result in combat between factions, classified as loyal and mutinous forces, as had happened in Mali. A Government crumbles only if the mutinous forces over power the loyalist forces.
Hence any attempt to take over executive mansions by a dozen people as had happened on 30th December 2014 without the complicity of those who are in charge of the command and control structures of armies or the support of a foreign military power is a suicidal adventure which is undertaken only when one’s aim is to assassinate a person or destroy a target and die like any suicide bomber. Such tactics do not lead to the liberation of the masses or change of systems. When they fail perpetrators who are captured often give evidence which could be corroborated to have every detail of their strategies and tactics. This leads to their demoralisation, especially when the weaker elements become state witnesses to get lenient treatment.
For 30 years neither the ballot nor the bullet could effect change of executive power in the first Republic. When change eventually came by the bullet in 1994 executive power remained entrenched for another 20 years.
The fundamental lesson is that when power is taken for the people it is always usurped as the property of the grabbers. The people are never encouraged to take ownership; on the contrary, they are always expected to owe allegiance and obedience to the grabbers of power.
What has happened should compel the state and the people to take stock.
It should be clear to all that power in a sovereign Republic lies in the military and security apparatus, on one hand and the people, on the other. The Regular army and security forces do not constitute a homogenous group. They are made of people with diverse interests who are bound by command and control structures and who do not easily capitulate during a surprise attack from outside of their ranks. Soldiers break out of these command control structures to carry out mutinies at great risks when they have their own grievances. Most mutinies result in combat between factions, classified as loyal and mutinous forces, as had happened in Mali. A Government crumbles only if the mutinous forces over power the loyalist forces.
Hence any attempt to take over executive mansions by a dozen people as had happened on 30th December 2014 without the complicity of those who are in charge of the command and control structures of armies or the support of a foreign military power is a suicidal adventure which is undertaken only when one’s aim is to assassinate a person or destroy a target and die like any suicide bomber. Such tactics do not lead to the liberation of the masses or change of systems. When they fail perpetrators who are captured often give evidence which could be corroborated to have every detail of their strategies and tactics. This leads to their demoralisation, especially when the weaker elements become state witnesses to get lenient treatment.
For 30 years neither the ballot nor the bullet could effect change of executive power in the first Republic. When change eventually came by the bullet in 1994 executive power remained entrenched for another 20 years.
The fundamental lesson is that when power is taken for the people it is always usurped as the property of the grabbers. The people are never encouraged to take ownership; on the contrary, they are always expected to owe allegiance and obedience to the grabbers of power.
The real task now is to guide the people to be their own saviours. Power belongs to them and government derived from their consent must be accountable and responsive to their demand for liberty, dignity and prosperity or be removed without difficulty or delay.
The international community has acknowledged the inevitability of government by popular consent. This is why all democratic governments are irreconcilable to unconstitutional takeover of power as well as unconstitutional governance by elected governments.
The December 30th event is a teacher. No one has monopoly over violence and impunity but injecting a BokaHaram syndrome in Gambian youths will not solve the problem of impunity. It will only lead to more impunity on both sides of the political spectrum as revenge killings take place in rapid succession. Blood should no longer defile the sacred soil of our homeland .We must no longer allow any Gambian youth to be the fodder of the barrel of the gun. It is the Gambian people who could save the nation and its youth from violence and blood bath. If the vast majority of Gambians decisively cast their votes for change no one would be able to steal their votes if the person voted for vows to be the sacrificial lamb for our democratic future. Such a person must be ready to be imprisoned or assassinated and still call on the people in advance to settle scores at the ballot box rather than by the bullet.
We wish to assure the sincere and the passionate that PDOIS could be counted on as a force which could unify the nation and heal its wounds. There should be no despair.
We wish to assure the sincere and the passionate that PDOIS could be counted on as a force which could unify the nation and heal its wounds. There should be no despair.
We are currently sensitising the people to dismiss the notion that the people do not have the capacity to change the country through the ballot box.
We have the plan to build a self reliant and people centred economy which would combine the most extensive Public /Private; Public/ Cooperative and Private /Cooperative partnerships which would generate employment and general prosperity for all.
We have the plan to build a self reliant and people centred economy which would combine the most extensive Public /Private; Public/ Cooperative and Private /Cooperative partnerships which would generate employment and general prosperity for all.
We will do prospecting to discover our mineral and gas reserves to accumulate sovereign national wealth for investment in the productive base of our economy.
We intend to utilise resources from Public enterprises and mining sectors to establish a cooperative banking system which would provide seeds, fertiliser and farming implements to family farms and gardens to eradicate the poverty of rural families and give support to community farms and other income generating projects to finance village development programmes.
We intend to link agricultural production with processing so that our groundnuts would be transformed into oil, Soap and butter, while the shells into cardboard and cooking materials. We will facilitate the processing of our milk into cheese, butter, yogurt and other products; our mangoes and other fruits into juice, and our fish into other products to promote self reliance and generate income.
We intend to link agricultural production with processing so that our groundnuts would be transformed into oil, Soap and butter, while the shells into cardboard and cooking materials. We will facilitate the processing of our milk into cheese, butter, yogurt and other products; our mangoes and other fruits into juice, and our fish into other products to promote self reliance and generate income.
We will maintain a well paid professional army, police and security force. The disciplined forces shall have the role to defend the sovereignty and integrity of the nation and the people. Each shall be given knowledge and skill to be able to function after performing one’s service.
All former members of the disciplined force shall serve as reservists who would be employed or engaged in self employment with the assistance of the state. Ex- Navy servicemen and women would be shareholders of fishing vessels provided by cooperative banks, or work for ship and wharf building companies to promote river transport. Those in the regular forces could become part of an engineering corps to serve as builders.
In short, we are in a position to offer a better life to all sectors of society, civilians or the disciplined forces.
We are also providing an end to the monarchical presidency by proposing a two four-year term limit for the presidency. We are proposing constitutional, legal and institutional measures that would ensure that the executive could be criticised, scrutinised and retrained by an unrestricted and unfettered media and a people organised into civil associations and interest groups aimed at ensuring that their concerns are heard and addressed.
The Diaspora should now identify those who have convincing messages and are capable of awakening the people and galvanise around them to build a conscious mass movement for electoral change.
In short, we are in a position to offer a better life to all sectors of society, civilians or the disciplined forces.
We are also providing an end to the monarchical presidency by proposing a two four-year term limit for the presidency. We are proposing constitutional, legal and institutional measures that would ensure that the executive could be criticised, scrutinised and retrained by an unrestricted and unfettered media and a people organised into civil associations and interest groups aimed at ensuring that their concerns are heard and addressed.
The Diaspora should now identify those who have convincing messages and are capable of awakening the people and galvanise around them to build a conscious mass movement for electoral change.
The Diaspora may best focus on three fundamental issues as the agenda which could be utilised to unify all Gambians abroad who have the nation and people at heart. They should advocate for the enfranchisement of the Diaspora, electoral reform and the upholding of fundamental rights and freedoms at home.
The trend of international politics reveals that the members of the international community would exercise the same resolve in combating violation of human rights, and disregard of constitutions by those who govern as they do against unconstitutional change of government.
Hence hope should still be kept alive that sooner or later, the Gambia will have a political leadership which would be able to build a country which will accommodate every citizen of this land and guarantee to all liberty, dignity and prosperity. This is the verdict of history and it is irrevocable
Hence hope should still be kept alive that sooner or later, the Gambia will have a political leadership which would be able to build a country which will accommodate every citizen of this land and guarantee to all liberty, dignity and prosperity. This is the verdict of history and it is irrevocable
THE END
Friday, 9 January 2015
List of Civilians Arrested After Failed Coup
Based on the information we have gathered through our tangible sources, the spy agents are conducting the arrest while the deadly elements of the Gambian dictatorship – the feared military intelligence and military police – inflict brutal tortures on these vulnerable detainees purposely to get confessionary statements.
Our sources are convinced that the NIA agents are civil as compared to what they referred to as “Jammeh clan men” who dominate military intelligence and military police assault team. Among the brutal torturers are also the state guards, our sources alleged.
Kairo News calls on human rights organisations, foreign embassies in the Gambia to be aware that arrests are going on. We will try to come up with the list of security officers detained and may be going through hell.
| ARREST AND DETENTION OF FAMILY MEMBERS, RELATIVES, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES SINCE JANUARY 1ST 2015 | ||||||
| NO. | NAME | AGE | OCCUPATION | ADDRESS | RELATIVES | NOTES |
| 1 | Omar Malleh Jagne | 45 | electrical and refrigeration technician,Ocean Bay Hotel and Resort | Latrikunda | Captain Njaga Jagne who died during the Presidential Palace shoot-out | Plain clothes officers, drove unmarked tainted SUVs picked them up. They are still unable to locate them and the government is giving no information. |
| 2 | Ebou Jagne | 52 | self employed and sells general merchandise | Lamin Town | Captain Njaga Jagne who died during the Presidential Palace shoot-out | Plain clothes officers, drove unmarked tainted SUVs picked them up. They are still unable to locate them and the government is giving no information. |
| 3 | Essa Bojang | The parents of two soldiers, Bakary Bojang and Dawda Bojang who left the army four months ago. | Thursday 1 January 2014, around 5am by three men in plain clothes and whisked away to an unknown destination. | |||
| 4 | Fatou Sonko | Mbankhna village | The parents of two soldiers, Bakary Bojang and Dawda Bojang who left the army four months ago. | Thursday 1 January 2014, around 5am by three men in plain clothes and whisked away to an unknown destination. | ||
| 5 | Bai Jobe Njie | Tallinding Dumos | the father of an ex-military officer of the Gambia Armed Forces who was said to be part of the insurgents that attacked the Presidential palace | picked up on Friday morning by two plain clothed officers from his residence in Tallinding Dumos. | ||
| 6 | Jariatou Lowe | Ex wife of ex-military officer of the Gambia Armed Forces by the name of Bai Lowe | ||||
| 7 | Yusupha Lowe | 14 | Son of ex-military officer of the Gambia Armed Forces by the name of Bai Lowe | |||
| 8 | Pa Aieu Lowe | 19 | Brother of ex-military officer of the Gambia Armed Forces by the name of Bai Lowe | |||
| 9 | Doudou Touray | 40 | Latrikunda Sabiji | |||
| 10 | Alfusainey Fatty | 42 | Latrikunda Sabiji | |||
| 11 | Ya Mariam Njie | Kololi residence. | Mother of Jarja Nyass one of the alleged attackers at State House and sister to Ndow Njie former Army Commander in the first republic. | |||
| 12 | Modou Njie | Kololi residence. | ||||
| 13 | Anta Nyass | Kololi residence. | Elder sister of Jarja Nyass one of the alleged attackers at State House | |||
| 14 | Pa Mass Nyass | Kololi residence. | Younger brother of Jarja Nyass one of the alleged attackers at State House | |||
| 15 | Ousman Nyang | Kololi residence. | Cousin of Jarja Nyass one of the alleged attackers at State House | |||
| 16 | Olimatou Corr | Mother of Musa Sarr | ||||
| 17 | Biran Sarr | Brother of Musa Sarr | ||||
| 18 | Mama Loum | Gambia Ports Authority | Leman street or Wilberforce street | This case is urgent she is sick and needs her medications. | ||
| 19 | Lamin Marreh (Nyaks) | Gambian Immigration head office | London Corner | A friend to Bai lowe | ||
Over 72 hours detention without court Appearance is Unlawful
As more family members of those who are suspected of perpetrating the insurgency of 30th December 2015 are put under arrest we must remind the authorities of their constitutional responsibility to either declare a state of emergency or abide by section 19 of the constitution which establishes a 72 hour limit to detention before court appearance .
The standards established for detainees during a state of emergency are as follows:
According to section 36 of the Constitution, where a person is detained under a state of emergency.-
“(a) he or she shall, as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any case not later than twenty four hours after the commencement of the detention, be furnished with a statement in writing specifying in detail the grounds upon which he or she is detained; and the statement shall be read, and, if necessary, interpreted, to the person who is detained in a language which he or she understands
(b) the spouse, parent, child or other available next-of-kin of the person detained shall be informed by the authority effecting the detention and shall be permitted access to the person concerned at the earliest practicable opportunity, and in any case not later than twenty-four hours after the commencement of the detention;
(c) where none of the persons mentioned in paragraph (b) can be traced or none of them is willing and able to see the person detained, the person who is detained shall be informed of this fact within twenty-four hours of the commencement of the detention and he or she shall be informed of his or her right to name and give particulars of some other person who shall have the same right of access to the person who is detained as any of the persons mentioned in paragraph (b);
(d) not more than fourteen days after the commencement of his or her detention, theauthority which effected the same shall give notice in the Gazette stating that he or she has been detained and giving particulars of the provision of law under which the detention is authorised;
(e) not more than thirty days after the commencement of his or her detention, and after that at intervals of not more than ninety days during the continuance of his or her detention, the case of the person concerned shall be reviewed by a tribunal as provided in subsection (2);
(f) the person who is detained shall be afforded every possible facility to consult a legal practitioner of his or her choice who shall be permitted to make representation to the tribunal appointed to review the case;
(g) at the hearing before the tribunal appointed for review of his or her case, the persondetained shall be entitled to appear in person or by a legal practitioner of his or her choice and at his or her own expense.
The standards established for detainees during a state of emergency are as follows:
According to section 36 of the Constitution, where a person is detained under a state of emergency.-
“(a) he or she shall, as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any case not later than twenty four hours after the commencement of the detention, be furnished with a statement in writing specifying in detail the grounds upon which he or she is detained; and the statement shall be read, and, if necessary, interpreted, to the person who is detained in a language which he or she understands
(b) the spouse, parent, child or other available next-of-kin of the person detained shall be informed by the authority effecting the detention and shall be permitted access to the person concerned at the earliest practicable opportunity, and in any case not later than twenty-four hours after the commencement of the detention;
(c) where none of the persons mentioned in paragraph (b) can be traced or none of them is willing and able to see the person detained, the person who is detained shall be informed of this fact within twenty-four hours of the commencement of the detention and he or she shall be informed of his or her right to name and give particulars of some other person who shall have the same right of access to the person who is detained as any of the persons mentioned in paragraph (b);
(d) not more than fourteen days after the commencement of his or her detention, theauthority which effected the same shall give notice in the Gazette stating that he or she has been detained and giving particulars of the provision of law under which the detention is authorised;
(e) not more than thirty days after the commencement of his or her detention, and after that at intervals of not more than ninety days during the continuance of his or her detention, the case of the person concerned shall be reviewed by a tribunal as provided in subsection (2);
(f) the person who is detained shall be afforded every possible facility to consult a legal practitioner of his or her choice who shall be permitted to make representation to the tribunal appointed to review the case;
(g) at the hearing before the tribunal appointed for review of his or her case, the persondetained shall be entitled to appear in person or by a legal practitioner of his or her choice and at his or her own expense.
(2) A tribunal appointed to review the cases of persons who have been detained shall be composed of three persons being, or qualified to be appointed as, judges of the High Court
(3) A tribunal composed of the same members shall not review more than once the case of a particular person who has been detained
(4) On a review by a tribunal of the case of a person who has been detained, the tribunal may order the release of the person or it may uphold the detention; and the authority by which the detention was ordered shall act in accordance with the decision of the tribunal for the release of any person.
(5) No person may be detained under or by virtue of an Act of the National Assemblyreferred to in section 35 during any state of emergency in excess of a total of one hundred and eighty-two days (whether such days are consecutive or not) and, on the expiry of that period, any person who has been so detained shall be entitled to invoke the provisions of section 19 (right to person liberty).
(6) In every month during the period in which a state of public emergency is in force and in which there is a sitting of the National Assembly, a Secretary of state authorised by the president shall make a report to the National Assembly of the number of persons detainedby virtue of or under an Act of the National Assembly to which section 35 refers and the number of cases in which the authority which ordered the detention has acted in accordance with the decisions of the tribunal as provided in subsection (4).
(7) For the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared that where the declaration of a state of public emergency is revoked or otherwise ceases to be in force, any person who is in detention or in custody by virtue of or under an Act of the National Assembly to which section 35 refers, other than a person sentenced to imprisonment by a court for an offence against such a law for a term which has not then expired, shall be released immediately without further order.
In the absence of a state of emergency the standards should be more humane.
(3) A tribunal composed of the same members shall not review more than once the case of a particular person who has been detained
(4) On a review by a tribunal of the case of a person who has been detained, the tribunal may order the release of the person or it may uphold the detention; and the authority by which the detention was ordered shall act in accordance with the decision of the tribunal for the release of any person.
(5) No person may be detained under or by virtue of an Act of the National Assemblyreferred to in section 35 during any state of emergency in excess of a total of one hundred and eighty-two days (whether such days are consecutive or not) and, on the expiry of that period, any person who has been so detained shall be entitled to invoke the provisions of section 19 (right to person liberty).
(6) In every month during the period in which a state of public emergency is in force and in which there is a sitting of the National Assembly, a Secretary of state authorised by the president shall make a report to the National Assembly of the number of persons detainedby virtue of or under an Act of the National Assembly to which section 35 refers and the number of cases in which the authority which ordered the detention has acted in accordance with the decisions of the tribunal as provided in subsection (4).
(7) For the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared that where the declaration of a state of public emergency is revoked or otherwise ceases to be in force, any person who is in detention or in custody by virtue of or under an Act of the National Assembly to which section 35 refers, other than a person sentenced to imprisonment by a court for an offence against such a law for a term which has not then expired, shall be released immediately without further order.
In the absence of a state of emergency the standards should be more humane.
Source:www.foroyaa.gm
Papa Faal Denied Release
By DAVID CHANEN, STAR TRIBUNE
A handful of protesters who support Papa Faal gathered outside of the courthouse.
A Brooklyn Center U.S. Air Force veteran accused of participating in a coup to overthrow the president of Gambia was denied release Thursday during an appearance in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis.
Papa Faal, 46, is accused of conspiring to violate the Neutrality Act by making a military expedition against a friendly nation. He is one of two Americans charged in connection with their roles in the plot.
Faal, who left the West African nation 23 years ago, has described the failed Dec. 30 coup as an attempt to restore democracy there. He said he joined the movement because he was disenchanted by the way Gambia’s president, Yahya Jammeh, “was rigging elections.”
Faal is accused of shipping a handful of guns to Gambia, hidden among clothing and other goods in four 50-gallon drums. He then went there himself, financed by the coup’s interim leader, a businessman whose code name was “Dave.”
But on Dec. 30, the expected revolt became a fiasco. Only a dozen or so soldiers stormed the government State House in the capital, Banjul. Faal had expected the Gambian army to flee or join the rebellion, but instead they opened fire, killing several rebels.
Faal fled first to nearby Senegal, then back to the United States, where he was arrested at Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C.
A second man, Cherno Njie, 57, of Texas, identified as “Dave,” also is in custody and made an appearance in U.S. District Court in Baltimore earlier this week. Njie’s case will be transferred to Minnesota, the U.S. attorney’s office in Minneapolis said.
U.S. Attorney Andy Luger said earlier this week that prosecutors and FBI agents worked nonstop over a holiday weekend “to uncover evidence of the plot to overthrow the Gambian government.”
Faal supporters say he was “a freedom fighter” of “good moral character” engaged in “self-defense” against an oppressive government led by Jammeh. About 10 of them protested outside court on Thursday.
Jammeh seized power in a coup in 1994 when he was a young army lieutenant. There have been at least four military attempts to oust him.
Attorney Anders Folk, a former assistant U.S. attorney, on Monday called Gambia “a repressive government” but said the purpose of prosecuting the two men is “to prevent people from conducting freelance foreign policy missions against foreign governments with whom the United States has relationships. … The United States government doesn’t want people to take matters into their own hands.”
Former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger also supported the prosecutions.
“We are at peace with Gambia,” he said. “And if we are at peace with them, it is a violation of federal law to conspire from the United States by preparing for or financing or initiating a coup or, as the statute says, an expedition.”
Both Folk and Heffelfinger said the charges could bring up to a life sentence.
Courtesy of Star Tribune
Gambia Comes “Clean” On Foiled Coup
Image of Suspects Provided Courtesy of Standard Newspaper
The Gambia government has finally come clean on last week’s attack on State House. In a statement, the Jammeh government avoided calling the attackers action a coup.
Read below the statement in full:
“On Tuesday, 30th December, 2014, at 2am GMT, the State House was attacked by a well-equipped, well-funded group of Gambian terrorists living in the USA, UK, Germany and Senegal with support from their collaborators abroad with sophisticated automatic machine guns and assault rifles. Five of these attackers launched their assault from the main gate of the State House by the Albert Market while three others attempted to enter through the rear gate by Marina Parade. The leader of the attackers was Lamin Sanneh (codename ‘Gibia’), a former Lieutenant Colonel of the Gambia Armed Forces and former Commander of the State Guards Battalion who was dismissed from the GAF and fled to Senegal and then to the US. He was accompanied by Njaga Jagne (codename ‘Bandit’), a retired captain of the US Army; Baboucarr Lowe, a former warrant officer class 2 of the Gambia Armed Forces referred to as ‘Bai Lo’ who was wanted in connection with drugs and fled to Senegal and then to Germany; former private Modou Njie (codename ‘Mike’) of the Gambia Armed Forces and private Landing Sonko (codename ‘Young’), an active member of the Gambia Armed Forces who was on study leave, was a former orderly of Ex-Lt Col Sanneh”.
“During the exchange of fire at the main gate, Sanneh and Jagne were killed. Lowe and Sonko escaped while Modou Njie was captured and is currently helping the intelligence and security services in their investigations. Glass windows and buildings pockmarked by bullets can be vividly seen by the gate. The attackers from the rear gate included Musa Sarr, Ex-Lance Corporal of the Gambia Armed Forces (codename ‘Kampama’); retired US Army Sergeant Papa Faal and Alhagie Nyass, a former personnel of the defunct Gambia National Gendarmerie and one Dawda Bojang. Faal positioned a heavy machine gun by the entrance of the Accidents & Emergency Unit of the Edward Francis Small Teaching Hospital and repeatedly fired rounds at the gate.
Nyass who attempted to ram his vehicle into the gate was shot dead. Dawda Bojang who was dressed in military uniform and body armour and positioned by a heavy machine gun was also killed. Musa Sarr and Papa Faal fled leaving behind their equipment and military attires. Other members of the group were stationed at Brufut Heights, some 25 kilometres from Banjul, the capital city. They were:
· Cherno M Njie (codename ‘John’), the main sponsor of the attackers and proposed Interim Leader. He fled the country after the attack failed.
· Alhagie Saidy Barrow (codename ‘X’) was the coordinator of the group, responsible for logistics and clearing of their weapons and other gadgets from the seaport.
· Dawda Bojang, Ex-Private of Gambia Armed Forces who deserted in 2014
· Mustapha Faal is a Gambian resident in Germany. He deserted the group before the attack. His whereabouts are not known.
According to documents retrieved from the attackers, this group was to arrest and kill Service Chiefs and other individuals. The team was awaiting the taking over of the State House by the attackers and for the proposed leader, Cherno M. Njie to take over the reins of power. All the four escaped and Cherno M Njie and Papa Faal are facing legal charges in the United States.
After the confrontation and the defeat of the attackers by the security forces, a large quantity of arms was retrieved which included:
· Two (2) Heavy Machine Guns with telescopic sights
· Seventeen (17) M&P 15 individual assault rifles with aiming devices
· Nine (9) AKM automatic Assault Rifles
· Four (4) Light Machine Guns
· Three (3) pistols
· One (1) Night Vision Goggle, (although FBI reports that the group had two)
· Eleven sat Pro Communication devices. Theses gadgets were intended to be used for communication among themselves and to communicate to the outside world when they have destroyed the communication infrastructure in the country after failing to capture the State House.
· Seventeen (17) body armour
· Twenty (20) webbing jackets
· Five (5) camel bags.
It is clear from the documents retrieved from the attackers that this operation was well-planned. The documents revealed their intention to destroy key infrastructure including the Central Bank of the Gambia building, Denton Bridge, Gamtel House and Kotu Power Station among other national assets.
It was also discovered that the codename the attackers used to refer to the President of the Republic of The Gambia was “CHUCK”. This is the same code name that the US Secret Services used to refer to His Excellency, the President during the last US-Africa Leaders’ Summit in Washington DC.
While we continue to assess the situation and developments, the Government of The Gambia under the leadership of His Excellency, the President, Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr Yahya AJJ Jammeh assures all citizens, residents and all true friends of The Gambia near and far, that the security and stability of the Republic of The Gambia will never be compromised.
The Gambia will continue to depend only on Allah, the Almighty for the peace, security and prosperity of our proud and dignified people.
The Government of The Gambia thanks all those countries that have expressed their genuine goodwill and solidarity with The Gambia in the wake of this terrorist attack.”
Ends
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)