IN
SOLIDARITY WITH THE UDP LEADERSHIP FREE OUSAINOU DARBOE AND UDP MEMBERS
CAMPAIGN
Dear
Compatriots,
Today,
at this very hour, minute and second, our hearts beat in unison with the
heartbeats of your leaders and members who are incarcerated at the Central
Prisons in Mile two.
Their
crime is associated with holding a procession but the court has confirmed
without any shadow of doubt that they were not guilty of any incitement of
violence.
Despite
this salient point, they were charged with 7 counts and convicted of 6 counts.
They were sentenced to several terms of imprisonment which are to be served
concurrently, thus earning them a 3 year jail sentence, partly because of the
existence of a law which was enacted since 31st October 1961. This Act imposed
mandatory jail sentence of 1 year for holding a procession without a permit.
This law was allowed to continue as enacted by the colonial administration
until 2009 when the penalty for holding procession without a permit was
increased to 3 years by the National Assembly members. Hence the law made by
Gambian members of Parliament in collaboration with the executive imposes a 3-
year mandatory jail sentence, without any option of a fine to first time
offenders.
This
retributive style of law making binds
the hands of courts and compels judges
to send first time offenders to jail without regard to their
circumstances, which should be given due
consideration in any manner of sentencing that is rooted in substantive
justice.
In
actual fact, there is need to amend such a law which came into being before
Gambia became a Republic. In his book Kairaba the former head of state did give
a narration of developments in 1961 which provided the genesis of the Act. He
explained how M E Jallow of the Gambia Workers Union turned his back at the
Joint Industrial Council and demanded a 90 percent increase in wages. On 20th
January his application for a permit to hold a procession was rejected. The
defiance of the Union against the
refusal to grant permit by going on strike and confronting the security forces
led to the arrest and charging of Jallow
Jallow for incitement of violence. According to Ex President Jawara Police reinforcement had to be brought from
Sierra Leone to provide more security.
It is important to mention that when the Colonial administration decided to
hold a Constitutional Conference in May 1961 ME Jallow was invited to be a
delegate.
Political
protests are mere manifestations of concerns, especially when they are not
linked to any incitement of violence.
Permits are just instruments for the regulation of public order. Hence
omission in obtaining them could be handled by dialogue and conciliation if the
extenuating circumstances which gave rise to the omission are given fair
assessment.
The
point at issue is that Ousainou Darboe and UDP members spent over two months in
detention and are now sentenced. Ebrima Solo Sandeng’s whereabouts is now
known. He is dead. It is his whereabouts that the UDP leadership sought to
ascertain.
Where
is his body? Every body would ask: When
is he confirmed dead and why did it take this long for his family and party
leadership to know the truth? If the law of the land was complied with in the
first place, would it have been necessary for any one to take any action to
find out whether he was dead or alive?
The
Coroner’s Act is clear. It states that “when a person dies while in the custody
of the police or of a prison officer or in prison or when detained in any place
under the provision of the lunatics detention Act, or of the Criminal Procedure
Code, the Police Officer or the Prison Officer or other person having the
custody or charge of the detained person at the time of his or her death shall
immediately give notice of the death to the nearest Coroner……….” The Coroner
shall hold an inquiry into the cause of death in the manner provided in the
Act.
The Coroner in Banjul and KMC is a
Magistrate of the first class.
Hence
Ebrima Solo Sandeng’s death should have been immediately reported to such a
Magistrate who, sitting as Coroner, has powers to hold an inquiry into the
cause of death and direct a medical officer or other duly qualified medical
practitioner to hold a post mortem examination of the deceased person and may
prohibit the burial or order the exhumation of a body to conduct enquiry.
If
such procedure was adhered to with consistency there would not have been any
need for anyone to protest to find out Ebrima Solo Sandeng’s whereabouts. What
had happened would not have happened.
Ebrima
Solo Sandeng is the key to the case which led to the incarceration of your
leaders and members.
Substantive
justice demanded for the state to sort out his whereabouts and give the true
picture to address the legitimate concerns of his family members and the UDP
leadership.
The
state should now have the moral duty to review the plight of those who were
driven to action to inquire into Ebrima Solo Sandeng’s whereabouts because of
the omission to abide by the letter and spirit of the Coroner’s Act which
demands immediate action in making death in detention a public matter that
should not be shrouded in any form of secrecy.
This is what is reasonable and justifiable in any society which claims
to value human life.
We had anticipated that your party leader would
say after judgment, if he was allowed to address the court before his sentence
was delivered as required by Section 244 of the Criminal Procedure Code,
that the wailings of Ebrima Solo Sandeng’s children and loved ones
at his residence, with the threat that
they would march to demand for their father’s body whatever the peril or the cost,
would have moved any leader of conscience to march in their place and suffer the fate that would have been the consequences of
their action.
This
is why we have repeatedly said that when conscience dictates reaction to a life
or death challenge, criminality should not be alleged. Consequently, we have
spared no effort in calling on the State to take this case as a political
conflict which requires dialogue and resolution rather than a criminal case
requiring prosecution and retribution. Our stance remains the same.
Your
leader had no intention to overthrow a government, kill a person or cause any
violence. The court has confirmed this by striking out Count No. 3. There was
no incitement to violence; hence there was no criminal intent. Your leader is not
a criminal. He has been a member of the legal fraternity for 43 years. He chose
to exercise his right to form a political party and participate as a candidate
in election.
As
a leader, he has an obligation to stand up for those he leads. This is a virtue
and not a vice and should be recognised as such by any authority that has any
regard for duty, justice and fair play.
His
incarceration for standing up for his members is not an ordinary event. Today,
the members of his party, the people who voted for him in the 2011 Presidential
election, the hundreds of thousands of Gambians who want justice not only to be
done but to be seen to be done, and the millions of people in the world, who
see the issuing of permits in the
exercise of freedom of assembly and association as mere formalities aimed at
protecting those demonstrating or
engaging in processions, would not go to sleep with ease knowing that the fate of the UDP leader and its members is
hanging in the balance of uncertainty ,waiting for those in authority to act
without conditionality in good faith in the public interest .
The
reverberation of the tune of the National Anthem as wailing supporters
displayed their shock and disbelief should drive home the message that the
proper action that is required to handle the April 14 and 16 incidents and
others connected to them, especially when loss of life is confirmed, is
political dialogue and diligent investigation into the loss of life and not
legal retribution.
In
our view, every just Gambian must bear the very words of the National Anthem in
mind as sang by the UDP leadership and members: ‘let justice guide our actions
towards our common good’; ‘and join our diverse peoples to prove man’s
brotherhood’ (meaning our common humanity). It is therefore absolutely
essential for everyone whose conscience is pricked to launch a ‘Free Ousainou
Darboe and UDP Members Campaign’. We will propagate this spirit among the PDOIS
membership and among all those we could influence until Mr. Darboe and all UDP
members rejoin their families and party members and continue to play their part
in shaping the political will of the Gambian people.
This
is the task before us and we wish to assure you that we will not be found
wanting in working assiduously, individually and collectively to achieve the
goal.
While
giving assurance that we are with you in heart and spirit in your time of need,
please accept dear compatriots the assurances of our highest consideration and
esteem.
Yours
in the Service of the People,
Halifa
Sallah
For
the Central Committee
