As the members of the AFPRC expressed contradictory opinions on the merits of establishing a National Consultative Committee to determine the time table to return to Democratic Constitutional Rule an intense debate unfolded.

We have been capturing the opinions expressed by prominent members of the society on the time table after the July 22 coup d'etat. In our last presentation we began the publication of the content of a memorandum submitted to the NCC by Halifa Sallah. We published a part of the introduction which sought to inspire the members of the National Consultative Committee to fulfill their mandate without fear or favour; affection or ill-will. Allow us to pick up from where we left:

Continuation of Introduction

"Your work requires the assimilation of certain characteristics if it is to be performed without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. First and foremost, your task requires you to assume the impartiality of the upright and incorruptible judge. It calls for ears that would he lent to all who have something to say without allowing prejudices or parochial interests to over-ride clear vision, the honesty to consider and accept in evidence all relevant information, the maturity and sincerity to be able to rise above sentiments to weigh evidence and arrive at a decision which is seen to be balanced, right and proper. Your task requires you to be the eyes and ears of the country.

Some people have argued that your Committee lacks personalities who are experienced in matters of governance and by that very fact cannot be effective. I beg to differ with such an opinion. In my view, what is important at this stage is not who does what but that what is to be done is done and is seen to be done. Representation by its very nature calls for the inclusion and exclusion of some people. All cannot occupy centre stage. What is important is to ensure that even if one is at the periphery one would make one's views known so that they can serve as ingredients in the shaping of the decisions of those at the centre.

This letter is written to make a humble submission of views which you may wish to take into consideration in the formulation of your recommendations.

THE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE OF THE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

The people are indeed the commanders of their destiny. However, they do not always have full control of the situation in order to direct their destiny as they desire. In many instances, diverse interests, levels of understanding and strivings may serve to undermine or militate against the forging of a common will to shape a common destiny and thus negate the attainment of our universal quest for liberty, prosperity and happiness.

Hence, if the future is to be shaped, the demands of the present must be known. This is the only way of knowing the foundation on which our plans have to rest in shaping the future. The question now arises: What are the demands of the situation? What is the strategic objective of your Committee?

The answer is simple. The strategic objective is to steer The Gambia to a democratic and constitutional existence. The task before you is how to develop a realistic transition programme and framework to facilitate a democratic and constitutional mode of governance. This requires the examination of all factors that arc required before a realistic programme and timetable could be shaped.

THE FACTORS TO CONSIDER

Your Consultative Committee needs to bear in mind that there are three angles in this particular geometry, that is, The Gambian people, The AFPRC and the aimed forces, and the International Committee. What are the elements which should be of major concern to The Gambian people? What arc the concerns of the AFPRC and the army? What are the concerns of the international community?

It is the task of your Consultative Committee to provide answers to such questions so that through the cross fertilization of conceptions derived from various sectors, a transition programme and timetable could be engineered which could be deemed practicable by all reasonable persons.

THE CONCERNS OF GAMBIANS AS A SOVEREIGN PEOPLE

While there can be a people without a government, there can be no government without a people to govern. Herein lies the reason why the interest of the people must be put at the centre of any discourse concerning the issue of governance.

It is evident that independent sovereign republics are products of the struggles of peoples to assert their right to self determination. The concept of self determination embodies the notion that sovereign republics belong to their peoples; that they, the peoples, have tight to determine their destinies.

Suffice it to say rights connote the expression of legality, and legality is an expression of authority derived from instruments providing for its existence. This is precisely why the birth of sovereign republics came with constitutional instruments establishing the sovereign status of such republics. Such constitutional Instruments define qualifications for citizenship, spell out the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizen, establish representative institutions and stipulate the qualification and duties of those representatives, as well as their mode of selection and removal, indicate how representatives arc to administer a country, define the role of the administrators of laws, the public servants, as well as explain how foreign policy is to be conducted.

Hence, the administration of a sovereign republic is inconceivable without a constitutional or legal framework elaborating on all the structures and functions required for its running. These provisions should be known to all citizens of a country before they can be considered to know their civic rights and duties.

Civic education in its most skeletal form embodies the sensitisation of the people to know all the structures and functions associated with the management of the affairs of their country and their role in the building up and operation of those structures to ensure the realisation of their needs and aspirations. This implies that there can be no proper civic education or transition to democratic constitutional existence without the establishment of a constitutional instrument which would embody the nature and characteristic of the mode of government of a country.

Of course, while constitutions may be similar in form they may not necessarily tally in content. For example, some constitutions do establish birth as a criterion for citizenship; others do emphasise the origin of parents and grandparents as a precondition for citizenship; some do guarantee the 16 and 18 year olds the right to vote, while others put the voting age at 21. Some do permit a 21 year old to be a head of state, while others put it at 30 or 35 years. Some give authority to a head of state to appoint Ministers, Justices of High Courts, Heads of Public Institutions, etc, while others make it a requirement to get the approval of representative institutions. Some Constitutions make provisions for members of representative institutions to appoint Ministers. Some constitutions make provisions by Presidents and members of representative bodies or assemblies to be removed from office for misconduct and maladministration; others enable representatives to legitimise misrepresentation,. Some constitutions give Presidents the absolute powers to contract treaties; others make it conditional for treaties to be ratified by representative bodies before they become binding. Some give representatives immunities from criminal and civil proceedings; others make them subject to such proceedings like all other citizens. Some constitutions reserve the right to appoint judges to Judicial Service Commissions; others vest the power to appoint judges in the President.

Hence, it is clear that there is much elasticity in the construction of the provisions of constitutions. Constitutions can be made to truly ensure the empowerment of the people and the accountability of representatives and thus bar maladministration or minimize it.

Hence, those who see the existence of constitutions as obstacle to effective administration of a country may not yet be acquainted with the right constitutional framework or are yet to be honest enough to realise the inefficiency arbitrariness, unpredictability and the personalization of the decision making process which is associated with rule according to the unknown and ever changing wishes of any given authority

Hence, it is indisputable that constitutions are indispensable instruments which enable the running of the affairs of a sovereign republic predictable , consistent and scrutinisable by the citizens of a sovereign republic.

Hence, the putting in place of a constitutional arrangement is of fundamental concern in determining the longevity and programme of the transition period. Your Consultative Commit must try to get an idea whether all key players in this transition equation deem the 1970 Republican Constitution to be adequate or whether there is need for constitutional reform. It should be able to get an idea as to how long it will take to carry out constitutional reforms and what institutions would be required to effect them. This is one important consideration. Let me move to the second.

Bloodshed and civil strife have taught human beings that if countries fail to establish systems which will enable their peoples to have a sense of belonging, irrespective of tribe, race, religion, gender or other sectionalist considerations, they are bound to disintegrate., This is precisely the reason why enlightened humanity had discovered that the best way of ensuring that sectionalist interests are not defended by force at the expense of the vast majority is to empower the people to determine their manner of representation. In this respect, humankind had discovered no better or effective instrument in determining or changing representation in a peaceful way, than a free and fair voting system.

Suffice it to say that if the people of a country have no other concern in casting their votes but to select representatives who will administer a country to protect the dignity, liberty and prosperity of each and the general welfare the act of warfare based on tribal, racial, religious or other sectionalist considerations is likely to be minimized or averted. Hence a transition to a democratic and constructional existence is inconceivable without a free and fair electoral system.

Hence every enlightened Gambian should be concerned that a free and fair voting system is in place and known to the people before there can be a genuine transition to democratic and constitutional existence. In this respect, there is no dispute. The Gambian people, the AFPRC and the international Community agree that there should he a transition to a democratic and constitutional arrangement. Infact, the AFPRC refers to its programme as a programme of rectification and transition to democratic constitutional rule".

A review of the timetable would reveal that it intends to establish a Constitutional Review Commission in December, 1995 and Electoral reforms in Decumbent 1996. However, it intends to conduct civic education in January, 1995. Clearly, education must be preceded by the provision of' the materials on the subject of the education. I will give irrefutable arguments why constitutional review and electoral reforms should precede civic education in my alternative proposals.

Furthermore, the timetable also envisages the holding of a referendum in September, 1996; the election of a Constituent Assembly in September 1997: Local government elections in March.1998 and General and Presidential elections in November, 1998. 1 will analyse these proposals to show the expenses involved in Voting and the need to harmonise these various voting schedules and thus produce a more realistic and defensible timetable.

Let me now proceed to examine the concerns of the International Community:

THE CONCERNS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

It is true that the Gambia is a Sovereign Republic . It does accord with the dictates of' international law that no country has a right to violate the Sovereignty; Territorial Integrity, Independence and Unity of another country. If the conception is restricted to this, then one may be tempted to say that foreign governments have no right to play a part in the determination of a timetable for a transition to democratic and constructional existence. However, we would be exceeding the bounds of reality if we conclude that the Gambia can he isolated from all other countries. There is no need to dispute essentials. The fact of the mailer is that just as the Gambia is a Sovereign Republic , other countries are also Sovereign Republics .

Since Sovereign Republics must relate, they are hound to do so on the basis of equality or dependency. International relations teaches that two policy options do govern relations between nations, that is, the principle of the supremacy of the national interest and the principle of mutual interest. The fact of the matter is that the more countries are economically self reliant the less vulnerable they are to foreign pressures, the more they can relate to other countries on the basis of mutual interest, the more they would be able to ensure that foreign countries do not encroach on their sovereign rights to self determination.

However, the more dependent a country, the more it could be subjected to economic pressures by foreign governments. The fact of the matter is that the former government had done nothing to build an economy which is not completely dependent on aid. Hence, foreign aid is not a supplement to our national efforts, it is the driving force behind development projects in the country.

A review of the economic figures of the previous government would reveal that between 80 to 90 percent of the Development Budget had always been financed through foreign loans and grants. This should not be confused with the Recurrent Budget which is relied on to pay salaries. It is a myth for anyone to believe that donor support is a Sustainable basis. However, it is equally a myth that donor support is not vital to the Gambian economy at this stage. Hence what must be borne in mind is that the crisis that many developed countries are undergoing have been forcing them to cut down on aid. Even though it matters very little to some governments what type of government a country has, it has become a foreign policy instrument to consider certain factors in order to be able to ration aid.

Suffice it to say that the current trend of democratization in the world has enabled donor countries to put the question of democratization high on the agenda as far as the rationing of aid is concerned for countries which are of least strategic or economic importance to them. This is the reality, irrespective of any value judgment on whether their policy is correct or wrong, fair or unfair.

The views of the donor community on the timetable are already known. They have indicated that it is long. The AFPRC has also stated its position on the importance of the donor community in this rectification programme. It has stated categorically that:

"The AFPRC Government reaffirms its commitment to the continued implementation of the macro-economic policy measures already agreed with the Bretton Woods Institutions and other development partners.

"Key planned interventions such as the strategy for Poverty Alleviation which will support efforts at citizenship empowerment and community participation: The Economic Management Sector Adjustment Loan, The National Health Development Programme; The Urban environemtn Project; Action Plan For Increased Electricity Generation; Port Development; including the Trade Gateway Project, the Development of Yundum International Airport; the National Population Strategy and the National Environment Action Plan will receive the urgent attention of the AFPRC Government".

{From The Document of the AFPRC's Programme}