A member of the Gambia’s National Assembly is leading calls for an end to the old colonial system, which gives the president the power to accent or reject bills passed by the elected members of the National Assembly.
Sidia Jatta, Peoples Democratic Organisation for Independence and Socialism (PDOIS) member for Wuli West, said the decades-long system of governance between parliament and the executive in the ratification and accenting to documents before they come into law should to be revised.
Speaking at Wednesday adjournment debate, Mr Jatta said National Assembly Members should reflect on the separation of powers between parliament and the executive, noting that the executive is accountable to parliament and parliament has the power to even impeach the president and all his ministers.
“That is a colonial system that has been in existence for years. But the irony is that when we make laws here in parliament, it does not become law until it is accented to by the president,” Mr. Jatta said.
The plain speaking politician asked the National Assembly Members to immediately reflect about parliament and the executive powers in relation to bringing laws to functionality and see what is wrong about it, saying parliament making laws that cannot become active unless accented to by the president must be reflected on.
“Is that the practice universally? No, it is not.”
He said the Gambia was a British colony and in the colonial legislature to be control by the monarchy, any law passed in the parliament during the colonial period was examined and vetted by the Queen/King to make sure it did not go against their interest. He added that the same practice is sadly continuing today in independent Gambia.
By Amadou JALLOW
To add my voice to that of Sidia, it’s evident to all who have ears to hear and eyes to see that we will either DECOLONIZE our brains and the system(s) or continue to languish in poverty and underdevelopment.
We did not only inherit an anti-black and anti-Afrikkan judicial system and penal codes from the vampire Britain. There are many others. In fact the whole gaddamn fabric of “(in)dependent Gambia” is woven from a legacy of slavery and colonialism.
Who will change these shameful degrading state of affairs and restore our self worth?
The Sen-Kambi-Ya youth, boy and girl, man and woman! But of course the temerity to stand up to the neocons and the enemy within comes at a price, sometimes, the ultimate price has to be paid. Life! Ask the three Faraba heroes, may God the most beneficent, the most merciful grant them the abode of martyrs.
_______________________
Let’s take a closer look at the system of crime and punishment for starters. For the limitation of space, I shall confine myself just to that.
The goal of justice is to bring the victim and the perpetrator to a “fair” process of adjudication. The victim has to be satisfied with the outcome of the process and the perpetrator has to come to a recognition that a crime is being committed. In other words, the punishment has to be humane and commensurate to the crime. In the African setting, this goes further to take the shape and form of transformation and restoration. Historically , this has functioned so much that there was no need for a standing police force and a prison to incarcerate. And then the uncivilized aliens arrived to “civilize” us. The rest becomes history.
That totally erased even our memory of what use to be. The harmony that existed before their sojourn became replace with their devilish institutions. They replaced our socialism with a trading in human flesh. Prisons were built for those who disobey them. Who is them? Yes, white people and their reps (Harriet Tubman use to slaughter them). She the ultimate woman liberator, unlike Isatou Njie.
_______________________
This is the legacy we are maintaining. What a shame!
In today’s Gambia, there are people rotting in jail for minor drug (marijuana) offenses depriving families of a bread winner. Marijuana we have to remember is today a billion dollar industry in the West. It is transformed into a hundred or more products not as a drug, rather, consumer products. Of course the “illigal dealing” is not going on without the connivance of the relevant authorities. I call for the decriminalization of the consumption of marijuana to decongest the filthy prisons (Mile 2, Jeswang and Janjanbureh) and stop locking people up for minimal quantities of Marijuana that even the magistrates and judges are using.
_______________________
It’s long overdue for us to make a total breakaway from the imperial system. Let’s begin!
Good call, Sidia Jatta,
Let’s try and fast track this bill, then we will be closer to true democracy (what ever that means/is)
How can one man/woman decide, if a law passes or not after a majority just passed that bill? Isn’t there a name for that also?
Mwalimu.
Keep that fire burning.
What is Mr. Jatta talking about? That’s the first question. I have to confess I do not know what he is talking about. Second, what is the alternative to what he is talking about? Please help if you readers can. If the current system we have in The Gambia, in terms of the functionality of the legislative body is not working, why is it not working? Thanks and have a blessed day.
Lol,
So Samba, Mr. Jatta is not making any sense? Ok, where did he loose the plot?
Because now, everyone should be confused.
I have no idea Tilly Bo. He said “parliament” needs to look into why before an act of the “parliament” becomes law it needs to be “accented” to by the president. If I am not mistaken, you seem to agree with what he said. If so, please enlightened me. And what would be the alternative(s) to what we have right now?
@Samba, I think Mr Jatta wants to take away the power of “veto” from Dr Barrow (the president)
alternative,
Let the people decide what becomes law
Have referendums to decide what becomes law,
That sounds like true democracy to me! that way the ruling classes can’t defend themselves.
it looks like our culture of silence that we enshrined in many parts of Africa, somewhere along the way helped spurred the colonialists stance. This is a very significant topic raised by Hon. Jatta. In the most affluent societies excluding the totalitarian regimes,Presidents do not have an easy ride when it comes to certain matters. In modern times one cannot talk about these things without learning from the American experience of “Watergate” when President Richard Nixon was impeached.
It is in line with the same political term limits that has shaken the political spectrum and with the debates that ensued,the democratic dispensations are gaining momentum.
No offense Kabir but I do not follow some of what you said. Are you saying there are no mechanisms in the constitution to somehow derail the president’s agenda by the legislative body if it sees fit to do so? If there are indeed mechanisms, why is the legislative body not utilizing them? I believe that is the million dollar question. The other equally important question is, are members of the legislative body doing what they have been elected to do regardless of party affiliation? You know, represent their respective constituencies who elected them. What do you think?
Referring to what Mr Burama Jammeh has written
“The Gambia has imperial dictation governance structure. It wasn’t meant to be democratic and is not democratic….”
Mr Burama Jammeh article is so powerful, I’m so surprised that the article only received 2 comments,
Mr Jatta he’s correct, the governance structure needs to change.
Free the peoples mind.
I thought the people elect their representatives to represent them, and in doing so the people are deciding through them. may be I am wrong here. Do we have to have referendums every time in order to make laws? I thought that was reserved for amending the constitution. Laws passed by the legislative body are totally different from constitutional provisions. You mentioned Burama. I know him personally. In fact, besides the name Burama, I know him by at least three other names. That article of his you mentioned has major flaws in its analysis. It also has some good stuff. I was going to comment on it, but I did not want my commentary to take away from some of the good stuff he said, so I made a decision to not say anything. In fact I do that often. If you are right that Mr. Jatta want to take away the veto power, then what is the check on the legislative body? And what will then be the role of the president on the laws passed by the legislative body? Is the president to just step aside? If he is not to step aside, then what? Do you know that the legislative body has the power to override the president’s veto. Doesn’t that seem enough to you?
Samba,
I think the submission of Mr Jatta should be viewed and understood from the angles of SEPARATION OF POWERS and INDEPENDENCE of National Assembly.
The executive, the National Assembly and the Judiciary are meant to be separate and independent of each other by the constitution, but this is actually made impossible by the very same constitution. For real separation of powers and independence to be fully guaranteed, these contradictions need to be revisited in order for these (separation & independence) to be meaningful. Otherwise, we cannot say that these THREE institutions are separate and independent of each other. It certainly doesn’t look so when the President can appoint and remove judges as he/she wills or decide to assent to bills or not, or cause Acts of NA to come into force or not, without any consequences.(from my layman’s eye view).
I think (but may be I’m wrong) that the exercise of legislative power by the National Assembly SHOULD NOT be dependent on any other institution, particularly the Executive, if that power should be free from manipulation and interference.
However, as far as my layman eyes can see, that’s exactly what the constitution has done in two ways:(Again, I may be wrong)
1. It gives the President the power to assent to bills (within 30 days) before they become laws.
The President, if he/she has any concerns with a bill before him/her, can send it back to the NA with a request for the assembly to reconsider and stating reasons. If the assembly decides to send it back unamended, then the President has to assent within 7 days.
The interesting thing, though, is that the constitution seems to be silent on what will happen if the President still refuses to assent to the bill within 7 days. Or is there anything that can done? Your input needed please.
2. Acts of the assembly which has been assented to by the President MUST also be published in the Gazette before they can come into force, and who is authorised to cause the publication of such in the Gazette: The President, of course.
Now, what if the President has 2nd thoughts after assenting to a bill and refuses to cause the act to be published in the Gazette, thus stopping it from coming into force. What happens then?
Indeed, there is the impeachment route through the NA, but that’s not straight forward and involves a costly (and probably highly charged & fractious) referendum to remove a sitting president. That’s not the best way to ensure and guarantee independence of NA.
Simply put, I think Mr Jatta is talking about the contradictions and absurdities within the constitution that creates the possibilities of encroachment (of one Institution:Executive) upon the practice of genuine democracy, where separation of powers and independence of the THREE INSTITUTIONS (Executive, Legislature & Judiciary) is maintained and upheld.
That’s how I see it.
Bax, great observations sir. If the President is to act within the 7 days as required and he does nothing, that Bill automatically becomes law after the 7 days. The fact that the second passing of the Bill requires “.. no less than two thirds of all the members …” show you that the President won’t be able to do a damn thing after that.Lol! In the U.S instead of 7 days it is 10. A president may choose not to sign or assent to a bill for various reasons. One could be, he does not want signing or assenting to a bill be later used against him particularly if the bill is popular with the masses. Check out section 100 subsection 4: please read the last four lines carefully ” … be presented again to the President for his or her assent, the President SHALL assent to the Bill within 7 days of it being “so presented.” That is telling us that the required two thirds to passed the Bill the second time with or without the President’s recommendations will become law whether the president assents to it or not. Guess what, it is similar in the U.S too. Look at section 100 subsection 3, you will notice that there is no two thirds majority requirement stated in order to pass a Bill, which means a simply majority will do. However, when you go to subsection 4 that is not the case. Bax, it is amazing how much power the National Assembly have if they dare to use it. Of course getting two thirds majority to force a Bill through without the President assenting to it is no easy matter because unfortunately the President usually controls the majority of the members of the NA. There is a limit to the Separation or Power doctrine. And we can get to it some other time.
You also raised the issue of what would happen if the President refused to “cause the Acts of the National Assembly to be published in the Gazette within thirty days of assent.”Subsection 6. You need not divorce subsection 4 from subsection 6. The “Shall assent to the Bill within seven days of being so presented” in subsection 4 means the President has no choice but to assent at that stage in the process and when he assents as required by subsection 4 within seven days, it follows that he cannot not have it published as required by subsection 6. The key to your concerns is subsection 4. It requirements the President to perform a mandatory act when two thirds majority pass the Bill a second time with or without his recommendations. If you by pass subsection 4 then the process becomes a contradiction. As an individual, the President has lot of power. But as far as the three branches of government go, the National Assembly, especially on domestic issues, reigns supreme. I hope this clarifies some things.
That’s very clear and helpful. I can now see that the word “SHALL” removes the idea of discretion and makes the action manditory on the President. I wish constitution writers would add a line to make it that obvious to us common folks.
What’s not clear to me is what happens if the President still refuses to assent to a bill after its 2nd reading and adoption by 2/3 majority. I know its hard to envisage such a situation arising in places like the US, but it’s not entirely unimaginable in our case, even without a character like Jammeh. We just have to remind ourselves about the VP fiasco not long ago. The particular provision also used the word, “SHALL” to establish the composition of Cabinet, thus: ”
1. There shall be a Cabinet which shall consist of the President, the Vice-President and the Secretaries of State.”
But we know the President refused to properly constitute his Cabinet for a long time. Though no time frame is mentioned (which we may need to revisit), the refusal to appoint a VP to complete his cabinet does seem to violate the spirit of the constitution.
Is there anything, other than impeachment, that can be done as per the constitution?
Bax, good morning. I wrote about the VP fiasco. The title of my article, if I recalled was ” Barrow’s Subversion of The Constitution And The Diyaa Kuyaa Principle of Constitutional Interpretation Adopted By Darboe to Support It.”
The National Assembly has the exclusive duty to legislate. There is no question about that. You brought Separation of Power principle yesterday and I told you that we will get into it. Here we go, just within The Gambia Constitution, please check out Section 100 subsection 8. This is one of many reasons why I have been saying that the separation of power principle though every important in certain aspects, it is almost nonexistent in other situations. Guess what, it is the same in the U.S. The last time the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a Congressional delegation of power was in 1935. Thirty years before Gambia became independent. When the National Assembly invokes section 100, subsection 8 it has to “delegate” to either a government agency or you can call it a ministry or the head of a commission of some type.Like someone who is going to perform executive like functions. Another point, please do not underestimate the two thirds requirement. I will say that almost all the things that the National Assembly may do to make the President do what he may not want to do in addition to removing him from office if we get to that situation requires a two thirds majority of the members of the NA. This point also got to show you that the two thirds majority to pass a Bill the second time with or without the president’s recommendations, limits the President ability do anything at that stage contrary to an ACT by the NA. The two thirds majority is the “gold standard.”If the President refuses to do something after two thirds majority of the NA have acted, then whatever punishment recommended by the constitution for when the president violates a constitutional mandate is in play and guess what, it will again require a two thirds majority to impose such a punishment on the president. Further demonstration of the two thirds majority requirement. As you know, it is almost impossible for the minority in the NA to reach that goal. It goes to show you the people we elect to represent us. I hope there is more clarity. Have blessed day.
@samba
“I thought the people elect their representatives to represent them, and in doing so the people are deciding through them”
you are correct, in theory, but things don’t always turn out like that in practice.
Re, Burama
“That article of his you mentioned has major flaws in its analysis. It also has some good stuff,…”
You should have commented, some of us, I’m sure, may have taken the flaws as the truth/facts.
And seeing that the legislative body has the power to override the president’s veto, what then, happens to the bill?
I know what the outcome is, in USA politics,
Not sure about The Gambian politics.
In the history of The Gambia, when has the legislative body ever override a president’s veto? I do not know of one; do you? May be, just may be, the problem is at the legislative body and not the president, because things are in place to override certain actions of the president just like the president may veto a bill too. If the president vetos a bill the constitution allows him to do that. But that veto can be override too, yet, the legislative body has never done so one time to my knowledge. Why not the legislative body first exercise all the means available to them, and if that does not work, then we can consider other means. Can Mr. Jatta say that they have exercised every tool available to them? That body had grounds to impeached Dictator Jammeh but did. One of their primary duties is to protect the citizens from the executive branch yet, they rubber stamp almost everything. In my view, on this issue and this issue only, Mr. Jatta’s argument is misplaced until he demonstrate to Gambians that the legislative body have utilized all the tools available to them to stop the excesses of the executive branch.
@samba.
Noted.
We cannot just say things did not work out or that they are of “colonial origin” that’s why it did not work out. Have we utilized all the tools available to us to be a better society? Let us not change things because someone said so without sound reasons to do so. It is always easy to point the finger to someone else. I would rather the finger is first pointed at us. Let us question ourselves and how we do things as a society. Let us fix the issues within first and then we will be better suited to defend against outside intrusion. You know, an honest old fashioned self evaluation. There are somethings that need fixing, we all know that. The Gambian experiment has not worked very well for majority of Gambians. We need to find out why. Why does the legislative body always rubber stamp bills that come before it? We have the newly instituted Constitutional Review Commission, did you hear any member of the commission say what the fundamental flaw in the constitution is? Many Gambians can point to a thing or two about what they believe is wrong with the constitution. Could it be that all the things that can be pointed out as issues with the constitution be all caused by one major flaw. If there is something like that, then keeping focus on that thing will go along way to toward getting it right. And if something like that is present and they do not recognized it, the same faulty mistakes will be repeated. I started writing an article about this very issue. I am not sure when I will finish writing it. I am not trying to shut anyone down. All I am pleading for, is for us to honestly self evaluate ourselves. We owe ourselves that duty.
Careful Samba, some on this forum are going to label you “a white lover”
They detest self assessment and taking personal responsibility for our actions and failures, rather everything wrong with our society, our thieving ways, our tribalism, nepotism and corruption is the white man’s fault.
I love my country and I am not afraid to look in the mirror and say, we screwed up, but we can and must do better, if not for us, for our children and the future generation. Well said Samba.
I bet some will claim that our inability to evaluate ourselves is because majority of Gambians don’t speak English and the greater part of those who do speak a horrible type like me.
I agree with Samba and Dr. Sarr here; that self evaluation is vital for us at this point in time. We perhaps need a much better taste of that richness in our ‘local’ languages that we claim. That’s where all of our mindsets are basically carved. Oops! Please let no one sue me for ‘local’ because they are yet to make it ‘international’. We need a Gambia name for geometry and trigonometry. Oh, how do we call tangent. It has to be translated at least 15 times. Perhaps Newton’s Law is an easier one. Newton La Luwaa, Luwaa Newton, etc.
I am exhausted for now. I’ll think of the right translations for √ π ^ etc etc etc tomorrow. Hectic! I’ll have to give a name to the symbols in at least 15 local languages. Take it with a smile!
Don’t let us become lazy Jack! (lol) Success DOESN’T drop from the sky. It comes from hard work. And if we are to translate into 50 languages, so be it. And “geometry”, “trigonometry”, “Tangent” etc, aren’t original in ALL languages they’re found. Science has a UNIVERSAL language and there’s no reason why we shouldn’t use that language. HECTIC! may be, but if that’s what we need to master SCIENCE, then it got to be done.
Dr. Sarr you know and I am sure they also know that I do not care what label they assigned to me. I am also well aware that there are persons in this forum who are waiting for me to writing something that give them an opening to attack me so that they can score a little point or two. The possibilities of that happening are greater than for that not to happen because, I know that I do not anything and I am not shamed to say so. I do not pretend to know anything. I asked for clarity and I analyze what I write and what I read, and I am honest with myself. I do not belong to any camp. Never have been never will be. One of the saddest things I often see in this forum is people who are obstacles to their own progress. The amount of envy and jealousy I see here is mind boggling. Some stand on their own ways of reaching their full potentials. Even though I try to help, that is not how it is taken but rather, I am seen as someone who comes to this forum to show what I know. What a shame. I am a Gambian and I am well aware of the prevailing view among majority of Gambians. When someone is honest with him or herself and thinks critically, they say, that person is trying to show us that he or she is educated. If that were the case in my case, I will never be where I am today. It is humility that has gotten me this far. I bow the heart and bend the knees and pray for the graces of the Holy Spirit before I study or write anything. So if I were to come to this forum to show off, then I am not fooling anyone but the most Holy Trinity and God forbid that I would do such a thing. Since thousands of people read what we write, it is legitimate to ask writerS to be clear in what thEY write. This forum is not a Bantaba to me unlike some who come here to hang out throw some shades, down some people, try to humiliate some and call it a day. Or come to impose their views on others. To impose one’s views on others is a dictatorial characteristic. If they cannot defeat you with the mind, they try to defeat you with diatribe. If what I see on this forum is a sampling of what Gambia has to offer, I can tell you that we are then in big time trouble. It is the ability to think critically that will prevent others from stealing us or deceiving us. Use our minds honestly and no one will be able to deceive or steal from us. And you know, Dr. Sarr, the ability to use one’s mind and speak honestly does not belong to any race or tribe or national origin or gender. The ability to use the mind belongs to human beings. And we all have that in common. To use one’s mind “correctly” on the other hand, is a gift from God. To me, there is only one teacher and that is God. If a person is jealous of a gift given to you by God then, even though, that person does not see it, he or she rebelling against the gift giver and not the person who receives the gift. And no, I am not bringing any religion into this. The focal point is not how much knowledge a person knows, but whether a person knows enough useful knowledge to be able to contribute to humanity. Anyone, these days, can go on the internet and culled lots of information. We call know that. But does culling all that information and using other peoples’ original thoughts help one to be able to think critically and that’s another matter altogether. Dr. Sarr, sorry I went off topic. Blessings always. Of course, we never met or spoke but they may think we know each other.Lol!
I’ll like to quote Ta-Nehisi Coates; Slavery and colonialism were not bumps on the road of our history, they were the road. The journey on this road has taken more than four hundred years. Four hundred years of meting every kind of imaginable brutality onto the black body and mind and psyche. Then we were thrown “independence” with preconditions to national existence, that literary means perpetual dependence and bondage to the West for everything. From school systems to administrative structures to even narrating our history to and for us.
Of course there were as are today, people in our midst who helped and are even today helping the white rodents to rob and plunder. These come in various shapes to exhibit one form of a neocon attitude or the other, none of them surprising to people who have been in the trenches of black empowerment long enough to recognize that which Fanon calls the desire for lactation.
Moving on, I will not name names of those who believe they will be opening a Pandora’s box should they utter the name Mwalimu. Yet, as always, civility is my discourse mantra and I’ll observe that even if insults come raining as brine and fire, as already obtained on many occasions. Am beyond throwing back stones. So let’s get started.
_______________________
I have authored an article in 2017 entitled “53 years of independence 53 reasons why Gambia is still underdeveloped”. Among other things, I have touched on the attitude of the cizenry towards taking personal responsibility for our collective destiny. Society will not be without the individual and the individual cannot achieve prosperity without society. That’s what leaders and policy makers need to bear in mind. So there are no contradictions there whatsoever.
When brother professor Lumumba from Kenya came to the university of The Gambia in February, I managed to attend the symposium on Languages. On the high table was Sidia Jatta, Lumumba and the program was moderated by Ismaila Ceesay the eminent political science lecturer. During the question and answer session, I ask Sidia a question in Mandinka. My surprise and agitation came when the audience applauded my action. For me, the applause was some loaded crap. Why? We have become so mentally attuned to ceding discourse power and space to foreign languages that using our own languages in formal spaces has become a abnormal, a deviant behavior.
I talked to a few people after the symposium who all asked the same two questions over and over again:
1) If we abolish English, what are we to replace it with?
2) Our languages do not have names for many things like biology, science, technology, financial markets, aerodynamics and the list goes on and on and on. How do we solve that problem? They asked. I’ll be submitting a paper to ACALAN (African Academy of Languages) on the topic lexifying and positioning Gambian languages in the 21st century later this year, Inshallah. But these are not the biggest problems our languages face. The mammoth task will be to reshape our own attitudes to ourselves and answer critical questions about where we belong.
Finally, I don’t have a ready made stamp to go on labeling people for whatever reasons. Time is too precious and life too short to be on a negative journey with the sole intent of bringing down compatriots.
In my mind, how folks consume and interpret comments is entirely left to each and everyone. How they judge the messages and the people behind them is purely a matter of perception. That’s it.
Yours in the service of The Gambia and the Black Nation, I remain.
Mwalimu, pls allow me to ask you this question: Do you consider every “White” person guilty of the crimes of slavery, colonialism and imperialism?
Thank you Bax for the intelligent question.
EVERY white person is born white because of the historical construct of black and blackness. In other words, to be able to recognize whiteness and be able to identify as white, you need the opposite to be conceptually able to make that inference. You and I won’t be black without the tangent of white and vice versa. But who is living at huge expenses to the other? Remember, racial categorization used to be treated as a natural science. Scientist like the German biologist Eugen Fischer were celebrated in Europe and America as champions of the question of creation. This is the “science“ that was used to justify slavery and colonialism. Only through the fight of black scholars (and some white allies) was this pseudoscience finally debunked and exposed as a lie and a plot to annihilate a people, completely. Racial science is still persistent in some quarters but it has lost its sting.
Please bear with me Bax, to first make the analogy about racial constructs and then answer your question, which is the easiest part. It won’t be long.
We have so far the upper hand against racial biology, but before we are done with it, we are confronted with the culture and politics of race. Believe me the white establishment is very persevering in hoarding and hugging unearned privileges.
The consequences of a deeply rooted culture of racism and politics of racism is as severe as the genocide of slavery and colonialism, “justified“ with a science. It has permeated every sphere of life on this planet. Nothing has escaped it. Even the devices we are all using to communicate have their root in the killing, oppression and subjugation of black people. The knowledges humanity prides itself on that spur our understanding of the universe and the abstract phenomena that lay the foundation for our comprehension of the laws that nature exhibit are a product of an anti-black world. I mean…why are we afraid to say, that is the question for me.
But to answer your question, not every white person is taking or has taken part in the enslavement and colonization of black people. And not all white people are directly engaged in imperialistic practices. Having said that, all white people are (unjustly) accorded the powers and privileges which are a direct result of black suffering. Are they still guilty of a crime by virtue of their absence when these crimes were put into motion? YES! Why? Because they are not denouncing a system that is perched on lies and the continuous suffering of black people. All of them? NO! There are white allies in the black struggle for survival and a semblance of freedom.
__________________________________________________
To conclude, let me say this: Not every white person will die as a racist but all white people are born racist. Some continue to unintentionally harbor biases against blackness, some deliberately. Others are willing to learn and accept that their white status has done irreparable harm to blacks yesterday, today and will harm blacks even tomorrow. We of course need whites allies to break down the vicious cycle of enslavement in all its forms. But they should learn to listen to us and only engage if we ask them to. We should be the ones who should be speaking and fighting for ourselves without fear of recriminations from amongst our own people and to be prepared to be liquidated by white people or the enemies within. That’s what am doing. Do I want to die? Of course not. Will I choose death over being a slave? You know the answer to that.
In the end, I hope my response has delivered some insight into your question for the esteemed general readership.
_________________________________________________
Yours in the service of The Gambia and the black nation, I remain.
Here we go again. Mwalimu, you said “EVERY white person is born white because of the historical construct of black and blackness.” Exactly what do you mean? Are you saying, white persons cannot be born white if it was not because of the historical construct of black and blackness? First things first, what is “blackness”? To have constructive debate, we need to explain the terms we use. If I understand you, and of course you can correct me, the color “White” cannot exists without the color “Black”? If that is indeed your position, you are dead wrong. There is a “color” called “white” that exists separate and distinct from a “color” call “Black.” and vice versa. Please let us tackle the issue with “color” as color and once we settle on that, we can move to your other favorite terms. Just “color” for now. Not race or anything else. We can get to those later if you want. For now, let us limit ourselves to the term “color.” If we understand what the term “color” is then we can look at individual colors which all affirm color. This is not philosophical per se but more like dialectical. You can look the word up to have a better grasp of it.
You made some absurd assertion about white people. Do you really know what it means when you say the following: “Not all”;”Not every” and “All”? Do you know that anytime you begin a sentence like that at least three valid inferences can be drawn? Please give me three possible inference you can draw when you use “Not all” or if you want “Not every” or “All”.
Mwalimu, that was insightful. I have no problem “belonging” to your camp, though I don’t share all your views and not quite comfortable with some of the language. Nonetheless, I have great admiration and respect for you and I see you as a warrior that Africa, in particular, and ALL oppressed and exploited people around the globe, without exception, need in their struggles for FREEDOM and PROSPERITY.
I am of the view that NO human is born a racist, tribalist, democrat, dictator, etc. I believe that ALL humans arrive (are born) into this world as innocent, almost angelic beings and it is their environment and circumstances that shape them. I don’t think a “White” child is born a racist, even if he/she was born into a household that holds racist views, nor is a “Black” child born tribalist, even if he/she was born into a family that holds tribalist views. ALL children grow into the adults they are due to their environment, experience and circumstances. That’s my view.
I do not also share your view that our “White” allies in this struggle, should “listen to us and only engage if we ask them.” I DO NOT accept that good people need anyone’s permission to speak and act against evil, whether that’s perpetrated against the “Black” man/woman, “White” man/woman, “Yellow” man/woman. Good people everywhere, regardless of ethnicity or race, should speak up and act against evil, even if their (racial)group is not the (most) affected.
And as I already said once, the struggle for freedom, dignity and the RIGHT to a life of prosperity is not necessarily a struggle between “White” and “Black”. It is a struggle between the oppressed and exploited against the oppressors and exploiters. It is a struggle against a system that steals wealth from productive workers and producers and concentrates it in the hands of an unproductive, privileged few. That’s the struggle the masses face and the racial divide must NOT be allowed to come into play.
Indeed “White” people, by virtue of their geographical location, “are (unjustly) accorded the powers and privileges which are a direct result of black suffering.” But so too are non “Whites” living in the same geographical locations, more so us Africans (“Blacks”), who deliberately migrate here in search of better lives. Why should “Whites”, who are born here and have no input/say in that process be faulted for being accorded the powers and privileges they enjoy at the expense of others, whilst we, who chose to come here and enjoy those same powers and privileges are exempted from blame? If we must go down that route, then we must blame the “Black” person who travels on good, first class roads, enjoys 24/7 water & electricity supply, have access to timely medical care, sends children to good schools, etc, just as the “White” person.
To conclude, perhaps it is worth mentioning how the homeless, mostly “White”, were removed from the streets of Winsor Castle ahead of the royal wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (of mixed parentage, with “Black” mum). Where does “Whiteness” and “Blackness” come into play here? Or, I’m I missing something?
Bax, i think you got my point in your question. A lot of the whiteman, ………. Proves an intellectual and racial inferiority complex in us. Are we inferiorly complex because we can’t put the over abundant theories we master into practical use?
Come on bro, I think we should stop crying over spilt milk and prove that language is not what makes us prevail in science and technology, the key to what many might consider development, but our curiosity to research and experiment. Bax, I think we shouldn’t be unnecessarily illusive or should say; elusive… Maybe I am and that’s called self evaluation.
Jack, I agree: No point crying over spilt milk. Let’s just get on with it. But you know what: there’s no harm remembering that milk was spilt, who spilt it and the circumstances surrounding it. That way, you protect against future milk spills.
Actually Jack, language is the key to what will make us prevail in science and research, along with funding and the right policies. You know why?
Because language, as the medium of instruction, either facilitates or impedes the teaching and grasping of scientific concepts. Once concepts are grasped, the curiosity of the mind is awakened and if steered into the right direction (policies important here), the results can be unimaginable.
I know folks may find it hard to believe, but I still agree with Mr Jatta. I think the power to legislate should reside EXCLUSIVELY in the National Assembly. The Executive should have no influence over, or input into the process, except to bring bills before the assembly.
Of course, that’s difficult to legislate against in a multi-party democracy, where the president’s party may control the NA and that’s one of the many deficits of democracy.
We must understand that democracy is not a perfect system; it is not even the complete system. I think it was Churchill who said that “democracy is the best of the worst.” (or something like that)
Democracy is still evolving and that’s why we must continue to explore areas where we can put something into the idea to make it better suited for (democratic) governance purposes.
How we prevent the executive from undermining the power and independence of the NA to legislate, as well as prevent the assembly itself from abusing that (exclusive) power (which we have seen under both Jawara & Jammeh), is an area we need to devote our thinking to. Perhaps, learned persons like Samba, can be very helpful here.
Personally, I will suggest that the power to assent to bills and cause them to be published in the Gazette should reside in an independent body of highly qualified, experienced and suitable persons from a cross section of society: lawyers, political scientists, media practioners, religious leaders, civil society reps and students. These people, who would constitute this independent body, should be appointed by a commission (whose members should not be under any control or influence of the executive), after they have been vetted by an appropriate NA Committe. They shouild not be removable except under conditions that undermine their ability to function or compromise their membership of the committee.
Yes Bax, I believe you are missing something. Before going further, let me say that to disagree is of course a healthy position in any given dialogue. And am learning a great deal from you too. I will leave the warrior status to the many giants of our struggle. Am content with being a foot soldier.
Let’s establish a point of departure for our little conversation. The three cardinal points in the analysis of culture and history are race, gender and class. For starters, the class argument put forth by you is very genuine. However, class struggle, as we know it today, is a product of slavery. That’s the explaination for why race supersedes class in the grand scheme of things. It we go a little further down the road and put intersectionality under the microscope, race as a determinant is closely followed by gender and then class. I completely agree with you, if evil is perpetrated, it needs only good people to intervene to right the wrong. I was however referring to an organized setting. Not random happenings. For example, if black people organize a BLM match, white people should first get a nod from the affected before they can participate. Or else, the social and political mobilization and organization easily becomes hijacked. A case in point is the #METOO campaign.
Whether a child can be born racist or not is open to debate. Here is my point though: In the classic sense of the word, white societies are today more than ever, reaping the fruits of slavery and colonialism. Children who are born (innocently) in this system, a system ENTIRELY (even the nuclear family structure) built from the blood sweet and tears of black people, that has a foundation of racism. Through no making of their own. This does not mean any guilt on the part of these angelic creatures. I hope I could make it any clearer.
Let’s come to the almighty geographical location argument.
A white middle class family is not the same as a black middle class family anywhere, even though the black family might be entirely financially better off than the white family. The reason been that the black family (this could also be an individual) is exposed to all the prejudices and violences at both the micro and macro level that comes from the white establishment. Let’s not forget, this is not location (geography) specific.
The distinction between a white homeless person and a black homeless person also needs some interrogation. What will be the circumstances leading to how they landed on the street in the first place. Perhaps you are aware that black people are more than double likely to loose their jobs, houses, credit scores and a host of other forms of social injustices than white people. Black people are also more likely to die from state sponsored terrorism than white people all over the world. And I could go on and on and on. This occurrences that might look random at first glance, is anything but accidental. Whiteness needs a counterpart to feed on.
Class struggle is found in all races and in every community on the face of this planet. In fact it’s evident that many societies are winning the war against class struggles by increasingly eradicating its primary cause which is poverty. Gender struggles are making headway all over the world. Look no further than Saudi Arabia where women fortunately can now legally drive cars. Are we (black people) winning the war against racism and anti-black establishments? You be the judge.
Bax, Marx’s approach to social order based entirely on class is very very flawed, for without race, class distinctions will become very much thin. The control of capital and means of production by a bourgeoise class is hinged on the industrial revolution in Europe. The industrial revolution won’t have led to a new era in production and consumption without the close to two hundred million blacks transported to the West to be worked to death. For it to make a little bit of sense to you further, let’s enslave the same amount of white men, women and children from Europe and transport them to Africa and see if Europe will ever recover from the economic, cultural and political lost, talk less of the trauma left behind in every single family.
__________________________________________________
Many might ask, why can’t we bury the past, live in the present and we all try to get along to make the future better. That’s indeed a possibility but only if the past is not the present and the present the future.
_________________________________________________
Is all hope lost? No. But only if we put more work into education, mobilization, empowerment, liberation of the mind, black economic consolidation, awareness activities and so on and so forth. All that requires sacrifice from black people like you and me. And as I said, it comes with consequences.
__________________________________________________
Thanking you for keeping the conversation going in a positive direction.
Still @Bax: Samba be patient with me. Am coming your way very soon.
Bax,
A black child cannot be born tribalist because tribe (a term I hate and that seldom makes its way out of my mouth) is empty of a scientific and political association, historically. In our societies, many understand it to be associate with language, traditions and place of domicile. Under strict classification, it will become an intangible category, meaning it’s unstable.
What will be the way forward in that conundrum. I suggest what Africa needs is the mass democratization of languages and cultural practices. In so doing, we will never ever loose eight hundred thousand human beings again because they either speak one language or the other and or practice a set of cultural traditions or the other. Am talking about Rwanda and Burundi.
Take your time Mwalimu. No rush.
@ Samba: instead of the pronoun “they”, we can agree that you can address Mwalimu without opening a Pandora’s box. Building playground alliances and engaging in theatrics cannot shake a true revolutionary.
Let me repeat to you once and for all that am not debating with anyone on this platform. I only engage in conversations and dialogues. Debating is associated with points, winners and losers. For me, we should all be winners here by sharing our thoughts on how to better our country and her people.
Let’s get down to business Samba.
You said I should define the terms I used in my little discourse on race. You want a definition of blackness, whiteness etc. Chuckles…..
A dictionary or google will do the trick for you. I am under the impression that there are no Junior school goers in our midst. I remember telling you am not a standing encyclopedia to give you every definition of every word.
Why should I define words for you independent of the context I used them in? You can’t be serious. Again, I remember you giving me the definition of what a circle is. I had to laugh out loud because you thought you were doing me a favor by guiding me to understand a material-figurative relationship. Thank you teacher but we were headed in totally different directions, just like now. It will be easier for both parties concerned to accept that. And don’t forget to label me as not capable of critical thinking, once again. I’ll love it.
Mwalimu, if you used a word in a certain context and you want people to understand what you mean by it, then you need to explain the meaning of the word you use if a person asks. That has absolutely nothing to do with being a standing encyclopedia. You come to this forum and write and expect people to read what you write or else why write in the first place. If you use the term “blackness” and I do not know what you mean by it, I think I am justified in asking you what you mean by it. You chose the word not me. I did not choose the word for you. I think you already realized that I do not use words loosely. When I said you were not capable of critical thinking, I meant then and I mean it today. To debate about issues of the day does not mean trying to score points. I simply questions what you say. Since you do not want to say what you mean by “blackness,” here are my other questions: Do you really know what it means when you say the following: “Not all”;”Not every” and “All”? Do you know that anytime you begin a sentence like that at least three valid inferences can be drawn? Please give me three possible inference you can draw when you use “Not all” or if you want “Not every” or “All”. It is when you use terms and phrases without defining them or not understanding what they mean that I base my assertion that you are not capable of critical thinking. Of course, by saying that, I am well aware that I am putting my neck out there. So you can prove me wrong and if you do, I will apologize. I have said this and I will say it again. A person’s writing say a lot about his or her mind. We can all gather data about on whatever topic we want, but can that date be analyzed and critiqued logically. Do you know whenever you try to make an argument and it is your own words and not someone else’s I can construct it in a syllogistic form. And once statements are contracted that way, it is easy to see. We talk in a style call enthymeme which suppresses one of the premises in our arguments and so once the suppressed premises is brought forth the picture becomes clear. Hence, the questions I asked you above. If you are engaged in conversation and dialogue then stop trying to impose your views on others. And stop labelling others with derogatory names. And of course answer questions when asked. If you do those things, then I will believe that you are here to have conversation and dialogue. And by the way, you do not know what dialogue is. Your style is so far from dialogue is not even close. Sorry, I am in a hurry!
Samba,
you must be either too high or in need of a fix of some kind. All your crazy allegations and accusations are without merit. Derogatory labels, absurd assertions, not capable of critical thinking Bla Bla Bla. Seriously, you are on a mission to prove something and I personally think it has a lot to do with your ego. Well you are entitle to inflate it, but keep Mwalimu out of that project.
Ach!! It will of course take you a shorter time to google the word blackness than asking me a definition every time I use a single word. Above in your posts, you have used terms and asked me to go reference them up in a dictionary. One rule for you and another for the others? That’s dictatorial and it has manifested itself time and again in your writings.
You want an academic engagement with apt topics, this is not the place for that, at least not for me.
With the benefit of hindsight, I’m coming to the realization that you are completely distraction any time I talk about the affairs of black people on this platform. Then you succeed in steering the conversation to irrelevant matters. This time you will not succeed. You ask silly questions without engaging for a single moment with the topic at hand. Lest you have forgotten, that is the decolonization of our institutions and our existence. If that’s not important to you then it’s obvious where your loyalty belongs. And that has manifested itself through your writings. Will I waste time on people who are out to further the white agenda? You bet not.
We have suffering masses because of their race, the black race. Their issues are much more important to me than the etymological definitions of words in the comments section of an online Newspaper. I’m doing my little to share the little I know and listen and learn from others. You are interested in debating and proving yourself to yourself. That’s why I said to you we are headed in irreconcilable directions. I ask you to accept that but you again want to prove yourself to yourself. You are really strong headed. What’s your beef?
I will be moving from this thread to the next one about Hon. Sidia Jatta where he critiques the language policies or lack thereof one in The Gambia.
See ya!
Our law makers must study, understand and respect the wishes of citizens. Our laws must reflect who we are. Our culture, religion and core beliefs. National Assembly members should call for laws that reflect who we are as a people and what we want and understand.
We are Gambians and must be ruled by the Gambian spirit, our own laws for our own people, written by our own representatives as opposed to NOT ruled by Colonial spirit and laws. Negative premise is a sign of inadequacy and weakness of purpose.
What is Gambian spirit:
Integrity
Fairness
Equality
If Jatta were to stand boldly on the NA floor and call for The Gambian law making process to replace what we currently have, if he were to articulate his rationale and make a case based on sound reasoning devoid of irrational and false emotional appeal, then the narrative will be based our national interest and political reality. We can all say ” Way to go Sir”.
I hope will carefully look at our laws and do what is best for Gambians, what works for Gambians and what Gambians can relate to.
God Bless The Gambia.
You said, “With the benefit of hindsight, I’m coming to the realization that you are completely distraction any time I talk about the affairs of black people on this platform.” You cannot be serious! How am I distracted whenever you talk about black affairs? Of course, you know absolutely nothing about me. I challenged you to explain words you use. That’s all I did and you refuse to do so. There is a reason why you refused to do. You are not more aware of black affair than me. You think because you claim and close your posting “In the service of The Gambia and black nation” and the like you have more claim or authority than the rest of us. You can read above and see for yourself whether you make derogatory comments or not. Anyone who reads our postings honestly can attest that. When you write on a forum like this one, you invite people to read what you write. May be you are not used to being questioned. Well, you are in the wrong place. You will be questioned and challenged when you write things that require further clarification. Some of the data you put out there, no one in this forum denies them. The exploitation of Africa, no one denies. The enslavement of blacks no one denies. The plight of majority blacks in the West no one denies; but, one this one, there are two sides to the story. You act like we who take different views from yours are “brainwashed,” “not black enough” and the like. Who are you to label anyone? You do not have a monopoly over black affairs. You have your views and others have their views. By dumping lots of literature on this forum to nurse your ego, you think you are justified, but you are not.
You wrote: “You ask silly questions without engaging for a single moment with the topic at hand. Lest you have forgotten, that is the decolonization of our institutions and our existence. If that’s not important to you then it’s obvious where your loyalty belongs. And that has manifested itself through your writings.” No one can engage you in the topic because it is your way or the highway. How do you expect people to engage you if you call them names because their views are different from yours. I told you before and I will tell you again, bring any topic you want if you are willing to explain words you used if someone like me does not understand in what context you use those words. Do you think for a moment your rhetoric will decolonize our institution and our existence? You are kidding right. By continuously pointing finger without, you think you are doing something great, but in fact you are not. You are engaged in ways that have been tried and did not yield much. The true black warriors are those who actually say, let’s look at ourselves and take care of the issues within. Those persons, though they have the right remedies, are not the most popular in our black societies. If we can defend ourselves then outside force will have little impact to exploit, deceive, or manipulate us. This has been my position and it has never changed. You said “.. it is obvious where my loyalty belong.” You see again, it is your view or no view at all. For someone, who does not know anything about me, that’s funny! Look at all my postings, I take the position of truth, wherever it is found, I take the position of clarity, and the position of honesty and fairness, and of course respect other peoples’ views. I do not apologize for telling the truth and I do not apologize for asking tough questions and for telling someone he or she is wrong if in fact that person is wrong. If you read my postings carefully, those are the things you will find. I know some people are not comfortable with my approach but I do not come on this forum to hang out and put people on the spot to accept my views or else they are “not black enough.” I am not aware of anyone telling you not to be passionate about your views, whatever they are. However, that does not give you the license to call people who disagree with you names. You can be the self appointed spokesperson for Gambia and Africa for all I care, but you have no authority, none whatsoever to think your views are right and those whose views are different from yours are wrong. I did not make an accusation or allegation that cannot be taken from your postings. Just may be, you need to read what you post. Here is another thing you said in your last posting: ” Will I waste time on people who are out to further the white agenda?” What else needs to be said. With that view, you expect me and others to engage you? Lol! You can label me with whatever name you want. I do not care. It says more about you than me.