A MOMENTOUS OPPORTUNITY THAT SLIPPED AWAY
  
BY MUSA CAMARA
	
The National Alliance for Democracy and Development [NADD] came into 
being 
by the unity of opposition political parties in The Gambia to avert the 
perpetuation of President Yaya Jammeh and his Alliance for Patriotic 
Reorientation and Construction [APRC] government in power. At the 
behest of 
the President, the APRC dominated National Assembly amended the 
election 
clause of the constitution from at least fifty-one per cent to a simple 
majority as requirement for winning the presidency. Few were in doubt 
that 
this adulteration of the constitution was motivated by the president’s 
growing desperation to avoid a second round ballot, a real possibility 
given 
the rising gain by the opposition in the polls since the 1996 election.


Even 
worst, he assumes authoritarian powers to embolden himself in the state 
machinery by consistent violation of the rule of law with impunity.
To many social and political observers, this unity in diversity of the 
opposition heralds a new era of political pragmatism that may 
facilitate the 
birth of a culture of democratic transfer of power in The Gambia, and 
also 
serves as model for emulation in the rest of Africa to reinforce the 
emerging trend of peaceful change of governments. They refer to this 
new 
political development as beacon of hope for Africa.
However, due to power struggle within the alliance during the 
leadership 
selection process, the United Democratic Party [UDP] and the National 
Reconciliation Party [NRP] withdrew from NADD and subsequently formed 
the 
UDP/NRP coalition. Everyone came to the defense of NADD including its 
eternal enemy, the APRC, to rightly cast the blame on Messrs Ousainou 
Darboe 
the leader of the UDP and Hamat Bah the leader of the NRP for their 
breakaway from the original alliance as a result of their arrogance and 
contempt for democracy in the opposition political party.
Unbearable pressure was mounting on Messrs Ousainou Darboe and Hamat 
Bah, 
when they broke ranks with their pioneering colleagues in NADD after 
they 
had already called on the people to support the alliance for the 
salvation 
of The Gambia. They were on the defensive for abandoning this patriotic 
enterprise for their selfish seek of power until Mr. Halifa Sallah, 
NADD 
flag bearer and presidential candidate turned the table away from them 
with 
the release of his recent statements. I do not only disagree with Mr. 
Sallah 
on the contents of the statements but also on the manner of their 
release.
First and foremost, Mr. Sallah should have called a press conference 
instead 
of issuing press releases to finally and unequivocally explain to the 
people 
that NADD will not change the ideals on which it was founded for the 
mere 
accommodation of certain individuals; that NADD will nurture a 
dispensation 
of democracy, and not a Banana Republic ruled by autarchic fiats.
Secondly, Mr. Sallah should have said that leaders are responsible for 
their 
actions especially those who seek national leadership; that Messrs 
Darboe 
and Bah who claimed to be a learned lawyer and a charismatic politician 
respectively, should not have only understood the letter and spirit of 
the 
Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] before appending their signatures to 
it 
but should have known its implications; and where they failed to do 
that, 
these were major deficiencies that disqualify them to seek the office 
of 
president whose primary function is to sign agreements of similar 
nature 
with foreign governments, organizations  and institutions. Furthermore, 
Mr. 
Sallah should have dismissed as irresponsible and reckless the excuses 
that 
Mr. Bah gave as mistakes by their singing of the MOU. Mr. Sallah should 
have 
strongly rejected the offer of negotiations for a future alliance [with 
their former colleagues] entrammeled with the conditions that only Mr. 
Darboe is acceptable to be the flag bearer and also without any 
arrangement 
for power sharing. Mr. Sallah should have exposed Mr. Hamat Bah’s 
disingenuousness and greed for the position of vice president which he 
pursuits with grandiose deceptions and shameless disinformation.
Thirdly, Mr. Sallah should have articulated in a clear and simple 
language 
understood by even a Grade Nine student the democratic and progressive 
values of NADD in contrast to the pretensions of the UDP/NRP coalition. 
He 
should point out namely that the UDP/NRP coalition:
1.	does not recognize NADD as a legitimate political party, and an 
equal 
partner in the negotiations;
2.	does not recognize any leader of NADD as capable of being the 
President 
and/or Vice-president of the country;
3.	does not want a transition period of five years should an alliance 
wins 
this year’s presidential election;
4.	does not believe in a two terms limit for future Gambian presidents 
after 
the end of the proposed transition despite the fact that most of the 
world 
have embraced that idea or are moving in that direction;
5.	does not believe in power sharing with NADD, not even when they are 
desperate to form an alliance with;
6.	does not believe in checks and balances both in an opposition 
alliance 
and in government.
Furthermore, Mr. Sallah should have recalled the people’s memories to 
Mr. 
Bah’s attacks on the former Secretary of State for Interior, Mr. 
Momodou 
Bojang, in the National Assembly in 1998, who awarded a no bid contract 
to 
TK Motors as corruption because the action violated the general orders 
of 
ause 
according to press reports, Mr. Bah contradicted himself in Nashville, 
Tennessee, when he announced that he had already signed a secret 
contract 
with a non-disclosed British Power company to provide electricity 
supply to 
The Gambia.  With this reminder, Mr. Sallah would have shown to the 
people 
that there would be little difference, if any, between the APRC and the 
UDP/NRP coalition when it comes to open government. Most importantly, 
it 
would also have shown to the people the irreconcilable differences that 
led 
to the breakaway of the UDP/NRP coalition from the alliance. This could 
also 
be a momentous opportunity to ask Mr. Hamat Bah if he had already sold 
out 
our country before his coalition assumes the reigns of government. Only 
Mr. 
Bah and God know!
Mr. Sallah should have also launched his “Campaign 2006” from that 
podium by 
attacking the Jammeh’s regime for its policies and provide alternative 
solutions that the people will embrace. He should have from there 
embarked 
on a nation-wide campaign tour. Instead, he has put himself and the 
alliance 
on the defensive: an apparent position of weakness for future 
negotiations. 
This is domestic politics and it requires all the fibers and strength 
of 
militancy on fundamental differences between political parties as 
regards   
which direction the country should take.
Halifa Sallah has failed to take a clear posture on the issue because 
of his 
be 
concluded that the upcoming 1996 presidential election is a four-horse 
race 
because the democratic values of NADD will never be compromised. 
Undoubtedly, the   sooner this is appreciated, the greater the 
assurances of 
victory. NADD must move on inorder to embrace its secured and noble 
place in 
our history. Neither President Jammeh nor Mr. Ousainou Darboe can 
defeat Mr. 
Halifa Sallah. Only Mr. Sallah can defeat Mr. Sallah.  In my humble 
view, it 
is still not too late for him to go on the offensive after his 
integrity was 
attacked and honesty questioned by Mr. Hamat Bah et al in the pursuit 
of 
their selfish goals. After all it was Mr. Sallah who helped us 
that “… clarity will help us not to grope in the dark.”understand 
consideration for a possible alliance of the two entities. It must 
to The Gambia government. This tour of memory lane is important bec