Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 43/2007, 16 - 17 April, 2007
Editorial
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE GAMBIA
On 10 April 2006, Lamin Fatty, a reporter of The Independent Newspaper was
arrested by the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and detained for 63 days
contrary to the requirements of the constitution that a detainee must not be
held for more than 72 hours without being taken before a competent court of
law. Lamin Fatty has been charged with false publication contrary to the
Criminal Code (Amendment) Act 2004 and if found guilty is liable to a fine of
between D50,000 and D250,000 or imprisonment for a minimum period of one year in
accordance with the Criminal Code (Amendment) Act 2005.
On March 27 2006, the editor-in-chief of The Independent newspaper, Musa
Saidykhan, was arrested on 28 March 2006 and detained for 21 days. The General
Manager Madi Ceesay was arrested and detained for 22 days. The premises of The
Independent has been inoperative since 28 March 2006.
Apart from The Independent, the only private radio stations that have been
broadcasting local news items – Citizen FM and SUD FM remain closed without
any court order.
Section 25(1) (a) of the Constitution stipulates “freedom of speech and
expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media.”
Section 207 (1) of the constitution also states “Every person shall have the
right to freedom and independence of the press and other information media
are hereby guaranteed.”
The constitution even gives the media responsibility to scrutinize the
government. It states in Section 207 (3) “The press and other information media
shall at all times, be free to uphold …… the responsibility and accountability
of the Government to the people of The Gambia.”
See next issue for continuation
FATOU JAW MANNEH’S TRIAL
APPLICATION FOR VOIR DIRE OVERRULED
By Fabakary B. Ceesay
In the trial of Journalist Fatou Jaw Manneh at the Kanifing Magistrates
Court, on Friday, the court turned down an application by the defence for a trial
within a trial on the grounds that the accused faced “mental torture at the
time her statement was being taken.” This matter arose when the prosecution
attempted to tender the cautionary and voluntary statements of the accused.
In his testimony before principal Magistrate Buba Jawo, of Kanifing
Magistrate Court, the first prosecution witness (PW1) name withheld, told the court
that he was asked to obtain a cautionary statement of Mrs. Manneh. He said he
introduced the independent witness by the name Babucarr Khan to the accused
person. He said that was done in English and Wollof languages. “That she need
not say anything if she wished to, but if she says anything, it can be used
against her as evidence in court, which she agreed to,” he said. He said that
she wrote her own cautionary statement and she went over it. He said that he
later realized that she left two other issues which they were discussing
earlier. He said he gave her another cautionary statement to allow her to touch
on those issues. He said that an independent witness was introduced again and
that she agreed. He indicated that she wrote her statement and signed it. He
also said that the statement was signed by the independent witness and himself
with his name and signature on it. He noted that a charge was preferred on
the voluntary statement and that there was a portion on it which asked the
accused whether she agreed to the charges against her. He said that she told him
that she did not agree to the charges but that she would like to consult a
lawyer or seek opinion or consult her family. He said that she also put it on
the second statement that she would like to reserve her statement. He said
that he obtained two voluntary and two cautionary statements from the accused
person. He said that when the accused was being cautioned the independent
witness was present.
The prosecution wanted to tender the statements, but was objected to by
defence counsel. Counsel Jobarteh said that the statements are cautionary in
nature and was indeed recorded on the 29 March 2007, from an accused person who
was supposedly invited for discussions and questioned by a group of men unknown
to her. “Any reasonable person wouldn’t believe that.” Jobarteh said that
the most peculiar thing about the story is that the witness indicated that the
accused said “I need to consult a lawyer or a family “and that the other
thing is” “I reserve my opinion.” Jobarteh said that there was clear
indication that the accused was denied her constitutional rights to secure a lawyer or
a legal representation of her choice. Mr. Jobarteh said that the witness has
told the court that the accused wrote her own statement but at the bottom of
the statements which indicates the name of the recorder what is there cannot
be associated to his client. He said that there is no signature on the
statement to authenticate it. He added that the cautionary statement was recorded
by a detective officer of the NIA who put his name on it and not the accused
person as the recorder. “Under this circumstance, we are applying for the
statement to be rejected or order be made for a voir-dire (trial within trial)
to test the voluntariness of the statements.” With regards to the argument he
made, he said the point is clear. He said the court would have difficulty on
the voluntariness of the statements. “You provided an independent witness and
denied the accused to consult a lawyer, we indicated that the accused was
invited for a discussion and questioning and was kept over night without
arresting her and continued questioning her for nearly a week, it is not possible
to have a voluntary statement from her.” He also said the period which she
spent at the NIA was not an invitation because she had stayed up to the point
when her bag was searched and nothing was found on her. Jobarteh said his
client was denied access to her family members and a lawyer and she was infact
held incommunicado. He then asked: who is the independent witness, where did he
come from, his occupation, did he show his identity card to the accused
person to show her who he was? He said he is sure that his client was not tortured
physically but maybe tortured mentally. “I’m challenging the voluntariness
of the statements in a “voir-dire.” We don’t know whether the statements
were obtained under duress, threats and promises,” he concluded.
The state counsel, Emmanuel O Fagbenle Submitted that the said documents
sought to be tendered are relevant under the Evidence Act, with respect to
section 31 of the Act. He said that the evidence before the court is that the
accused wrote the statement with her own hand writing. He added that the fact
that the document was not authenticated is not a reason. “The fact that there is
nothing to show that the accused was given an opportunity to consult a
lawyer cannot be found on the face of the document sought to be tendered. It is a
matter of evidence which cannot be rejected. I therefore urge this court to
overrule the objection made by the defense counsel.”
In delivering the ruling, Magistrate Jawo, said that the ground for a “
voir-dire” is overruled. He said that the defence should have laid a foundation
for a “voir-dire.” He added that the “voir-dire” must be based on suspicion
of duress, torture or threat. “Consequently the document sought to be tendered
is hereby accepted as an exhibit. He overruled the idea of “voir-dire”
(trial within a trial). The statements were all admitted in evidence and the
court was adjourned till Friday 20 April 2007.
Court Overrules Defence Objection
Magistrate Buba Jawo of Kanifing Magistrates Court, on Wednesday 11th April,
overruled the objection raised by the defence counsel, Lamin Jobarteh, on
the lack of jurisdiction of the court to hear the case on the ground that
offenses committed outside The Gambia cannot be tried by Gambian courts.
During his objection, Counsel Jobarteh told the court that the counts did
not contain the name of the person or to whom the interview was granted. He
asked, where the individual whom the interview was granted was and where the
accused person was when she granted an interview. He also asked: Where was the
publication done and who published the article?
Mr. Jobarteh said that they have been denied actual information about the
whole case. He cited section 110 of the criminal procedure code (CPC),
indicating charges and information. He also cited section 113 of CPC to back his
claims. “The concerns that we raised is that we have been denied the reasonable
information in the nature of the case,” he continued. “The publishing
newspaper must be stated and the person who published it. I therefore submit that
the charge sheet be struck out, for uncertainty and denying the defendant with
reasonable information,” he argued.
Mr. Jobarteh submitted that it is out of the question for the court to hear
the case, because the court lacks jurisdiction over it. He said that”
whatsoever the case, it is not a continuing offence which is said to have been
committed in any of the perimeters of the local limits of the jurisdiction of the
court.” Mr. Jobarteh stated that the accused could not be in the USA and
commit an offence in The Gambia and adding that “close the chapter in this case”
. He then cited Granvill Williams, on the terminology of the theory of
jurisdiction and venue and ambit of the criminal law. Jobarteh also cited section
58 which he said makes the matter very clear. He asks whether by referring to
local area limits the USA is considered to be within the local area of The
Gambia.”
“Most importantly, the charges are statute bound,” Counsel Jobarteh argued.
He referred to count one which states that the date of the Interview was on
the 23 October 2005 and then cited section 53(1) of Criminal Code which
states that the offence must be committed within duration of six months. He also
cited the case of one Omar Camara and the state and the case of IGP vs.
Ansumana Darboe. He said that those cases were presided over by Justice Yeboah. “I
therefore urged this court to dismiss the charges against the accused person
for duplicity, difficult informal procedure and uncertainty for failure to
provide reasonable information about the case”, Counsel Jobarteh concluded.
The state counsel, E.O Fagbenle argued that the charge sheet contained
sufficient information under the laws of The Gambia and that the court has the
right to hear the case. He said that under summary jurisdiction the charges are
clear to enable the accused to take her plea. He claimed that the charge
sheet contained all the required information and that firstly the accused person
was living in the USA but was presently present in The Gambia. He said that
there was a publication which is subjected to a publisher. He said, “it was
published in the internet which is a universal publication including the Gambia.
Articles posted at the internet are for the whole world and it remains at
the net continuously.” Mr. Fagbenle said that even though the alleged offences
are committed at the USA, it was committed by a Gambian citizen. He said that
the charge before the court is that the accused was responsible for a
publication of offensive words contained in a publication of a certain date. He
said that the contents of the publication are included in the charge sheet which
was read to the accused person. He said that taking a plea means two things,
whether the accused published it or does not publish it. He emphasised that
the name of the publisher is not the issue in the case. “The issue before the
court is whether the accused is responsible for the alleged offence or not.
The law did not require that every evidence should be put in the charge
sheet. I want to submit that section 113 of CPC exonerated the charge. There is
ample support in the charge sheet and there is no need for referral advice. I
therefore urge this court to uphold the charges and overrule the defence
objection,” he advised.
Defence counsel Jobarteh also added that, even though the alleged offences
were committed by A Gambian citizen outside the country, the accused must at
that time be an employee of the government. He said, “The internet was not in
The Gambia but that you have to click somewhere for it to go out into The
Gambia.”
When delivering his ruling, Magistrate Jawo cited section 69 of CPC, which
provides defects on the face of the charges cannot invalidate any proceedings.
He also ruled that the court have jurisdiction to hear the matter. He added
that the law states that, within six months of the arrival of the accused
person. “I therefore overrule the defence’s objection on the court’s
jurisdiction to hear the case.”
PRIVATE GROUNDNUT BUYER DRAGGED TO COURT
By Yaya Dampha
One Mr. Baba Sanneh, a private groundnut buyer, is currently standing trial
before travelling Magistrate Amadou Tony Baldeh at Bansang Court House. Mr.
Sanneh is said to be registered as a private buyer in the 2004 – 2005 trade
season and operated in the community of Kerr Njaka in Central River Region. He
is alleged to have owed farmers over sixty two thousand dalasis (D62, 000).
Mr. Baba Sanneh is charged with obtaining goods by false pretence contrary
to Section 288 of the Criminal Code, which provides for a maximum penalty of 3
years.
Giving evidence before a crowded court, on Thursday Mr. Baba Sanneh said he
was registered as a private buyer in 2004 – 2005 trade season in different
communities including Kerr Njaka. He said he had asked one Mr. Ada Jaye who is
the President of the Farmer’ Association whether they can work with him. He
said they agreed on a bonus of D200 to the Kafoo for each tonne they brought
to the depot to meet their expenses at the Kafoo level including salaries. He
said his Secretary one Mr. Kejera informed him that the total purchase was
179 tonnes 817.5 kilo grammes. Mr. Sanneh noted that he had discovered that the
receipts brought to him showed that the total purchase was 174 tonnes 0.4
kg. He said the commission for the society is D34,000 total expense was
D1,409,724. He said there is a difference of five tonnes seven hundred sevety-seven
point five kg (5 tonnes 777.5 kg).
During cross examination he told the court that all the receipts delivered
to him by the farmers were destroyed by the rains. He denied that he asked Mr.
Kijera the Secretary to be buying nuts on credit basis. He further said
buying on credit basis is a common practice. When asked about his payment
vouchers he said most of the papers are at the GGC depot in Banjul.
Magistrate Tony Baldeh asked him to bring all the documents by the next
sitting. The matter is adjourned indefinitely.
NDAM WITHDRAWS FROM NADD
The Secretary General of the National Democratic Action Movement (NDAM), Mr.
Lamin Waa Juwara, has written to inform the general public of their
withdrawal from NADD Alliance with immediate effect.
The Secretary General in his letter dated 4th April to the NADD Executive
said he is directed by the NDAM Executive Committee to write and convey their
decision to withdraw from the NADD Alliance. Mr. Juwara, who thanked the NADD
Executive for the solidarity during their stay together as a team, asserted
that they (the NDAM) do not rule out the possibility of any alliance in the
future. He, however, said for now they strongly feel that it is prudent to go
it alone.
The Independent – Closed For a Year
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
Last month marked a year since the closure of The Independent Newspaper, a
private bi-weekly.
Madi Ceesay, the Paper’s Managing Editor at the time of its closure and
president of the Gambia Press Union (GPU) told Foroyaa that as at now he does not
know who is exactly responsible for the closure of the paper.
“Since we (staff of The Independent) were rounded up on the 27th of March,
2006 the police occupied the place. I cannot have audience with any authority
in the police,” Ceesay said.
After spending three weeks in custody, he said, he was told by officials of
the police, the military and the National Intelligence Agency that he is
allowed to resume work, but that he should serve as a partner in development with
the government.
:But unfortunately he said it is never the case. After that release, “I
attempted to open the newspaper, but it was shut down by the police,” he claimed.
Mr. Ceesay further said that he had attempted to meet the then Inspector
General of Police on several occasions, but his attempts bore no fruit.
He also said that the closure of the media organisations in the country is
not painting a good image of the country as freedom of expression and the
press is a prerequisite for any healthy democracy.
However, the police spokesman Superintendent Famara Jobarteh told Foroyaa on
Thursday that he knew nothing about the closure of The Independent.
VICTIMS OF APRIL 10 AND 11 SEEK ASSISTANCE
By Madiba Singhateh
It has been seven years since the April 10 and 11 2000 student riots took
place. Some injured students are still suffering from the injuries they
sustained from gunshots. Reports have it that such students are in desperate need
for treatment.
One of them Abdoukarim Jammeh, said he, Sainey Senghore and Yusupha Mbye are
among survivor victims. When Abdoukarim came to our office on April 10, he
said he had come to remind Gambians and non-Gambians alike that they need
help. He said helping them as Gambians is like helping their sons and brothers,
since they too are Gambian youths. He said students had nothing in their hands
expect a pens and books but yet soldiers killed some land made others like
him disabled. He said Gambian people should commemorate this day and recognise
it as a day of national mourning and holiday. He said it was on that day
that many warned students were killed. He went on to say that they would
appreciate assistance from Gambians here and abroad as they need overseas treatment
to better their lot.
Abdoukarim Jammeh who was shot in his left knee now uses a walking stick. He
said Sainey Senghore is suffering from an injury from a shot in the leg and
Yusupha Mbye has been handicapped, if not paralysed in a similar
circumstance. They all need help.
Abdoukarim said he went as far as Dakar but his health problem has not been
solved. He claims to have all his medical records and reports that indicate
he needs overseas treatment. Abdoukarim said before being discharged from the
hospital he had been admitted for three months in the hospital. Those who
wish to assist this young man can contact him by telephone on 7016186.
KAWSU CEESAY’S TRIAL
Did The Chairman Approve?
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
Did the Chairman approve the order made by the Chief Electoral Officer, Mr.
Kawsu Ceesay, to Code Incorporate, a Canadian company, for the supply of
electrical materials to the IEC? This was an issue in the testimony of a former
member of the Commission, Mr. Sulayman Sait Mboob at the trial of Mr. Ceesay,
charged with forgery, at the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, 11
April, 2007.
The prosecution witness Sulayman Sait Mboob said this under
cross-examination by Musa Batchilly, counsel for the defence. Mr. Mboob, also a former
Secretary of State for Agriculture, told the court that the accused person was
instructed to look for the invoices following a decision by commission members in
a meeting.
Mr. Mboob said that the accused person Ceesay, initially got an invoice from
Code Incorporate of Canada and later on brought another invoice from Land
Trade.
He said that he had discussions with the then Chairman, Ndondi Njie and the
accused person concerning Code Incorporate. Mboob agreed with the defence
that he will be surprised to learn that the ex-chairman, Ndondi Njie denied
having discussion with the accused person.
At a commission meeting Mboob said, both the accused person and the
ex-chairman were arguing on the approval of the buying of the electoral materials
from Code Incorporate.
Formerly, he said, there was no system of procurement at the IEC, until the
arrival of the then chairman, Mr. Njie who introduced a procedure for
procurement.
Testifying earlier, Mboob said he was working with the IEC from July 2005 to
August 2006 and identified the accused person, who he said was the Chief
Electoral Officer. During that period he said Ndondi Njie was the chairman of
the IEC.
Mboob narrated that he knew the Canadian Company, Code Incorporate through
correspondence between the accused person and the company. According to him he
was told by the accused person that Code Incorporate was engaged in the
supply of electoral materials to the commission.
He said that all the correspondence by the accused person were for the
placing of an order for the supply of electoral materials.
Code Incorporate was demanding payment for the order placed by the accused
person, he said, while the then chairman of IEC, Ndondi Niie was disputing the
approval of the order.
At a commission members’ meeting, Mboob said, which the accused person and
the director of administration attended, both the IEC chairman and the accused
person were asked to prove their case.
The accused person insisted at the meeting that the chairman gave him a
verbal approval to make the order, he said. But on the other hand, Mr. Njie
denied ever giving Mr. Ceesay the approval to place an order for the supply of
electoral materials from Code Incorporate.
Testifying further, he told the court that at the commission’s meeting Mr.
Ceesay was asked to show a written document or a witness to prove that he was
given approval. He said the accused person never provided these. Mr. Mboob
also told the court that he himself did not see any approval on the supply of
electoral materials.
The new procedure at the IEC initiated by Mr. Njie requires that a
requisition form need to be filled in by the officials making the request, he told the
court. The form, he said, is to be signed by the head of department or the
most senior person in that particular department. The form will then be sent
to the IEC Chairman to approve it which depends on the amount involved.
Under the Gambia Public Procurement Authority (GPPA) rules, he said, if the
amount involved in the procurement qualifies for a tender, the official
making the procurement has to make three invoices from different companies.
He attested that he has neither seen Mr. Ceesay filling in the requisition
form nor seen any document purporting the approval of the order by Mr. Njie.
The accused person is expected to re-appear before Magistrate Babucarr Secka
on April 24 for continuation.
LANCE CORPORAL YANKUBA JARJUE PASSES AWAY
By Yaya Dampha
Lance Corporal Yankuba Jarjue of the guard battalion (Gambia National Guard)
Fajara Barracks passed away on Thursday 12 April 2006. A brother of the
deceased called this reporter early Thursday to inform him of the death of L/CPL
Jarjue.
Lance Corporal Jarjue was admitted at the Shell Ward of the Royal Victoria
Teaching Hospital (RVTH) in Banjul since last December. The diagnosis was
hepatoma (B) and the medical board recommended overseas treatment for him. He had
since then been seeking for assistance from any Good Samaritan.
Late last month, family members contacted this reporter to carry a story on
him so that he may have assistance. Our reporter contacted the Army Public
Relations Officer who also said they are trying their best to take Jarjue
abroad. He said their problem is that the army does not have their own budget, so
they have to rely on the Department of State for Defence.
Since then the 23 year old army officer was every day expecting to go abroad
until he met abroad his last breath on Thursday 12 April 2007.
He graduated from the University of The Gambia this year with a major in
economics.
Lance Corporal Jarjue was given a military salute (a twelve gun fire) at his
home village in Makumbaya, Kombo North.
FOCUS ON POLITICS
THE 1977 ELECTION DUST, SETTLED
With Suwaibou Touray
We have been focusing on the history of The Gambia from pre-independence to
post-independence era. Earlier on, we have shed light on the events leading
to the 1977 General Elections. Let us start from where we have stopped.
As the dust was settling down and the opposition was trying to make sense of
all what was happening, with the cries for foul play and intimidation of
opponents up to the point of using pistols, by cabinet ministers in remote
villages. The PPP was painting everything rosy. For example, the Information and
Broadcasting Services booklet described the period as thus; The Gambian
politics is respected by its tranquil nature, especially at times of general
respect for law and order, and the people’s abiding inclination to remain peaceful.
It opined that this was what had brought about years of political stability
and progress which it said the president had himself attributed to. The
information booklet whose author was not mentioned went on to assert that “The
climate of political tolerance” had in turn, contributed tremendously to the
development of Gambian democracy. It further concluded that all political
parties campaigned vigorously and freely in the elections. The Progressive
Newspaper reporter opined that the opposition filed candidates in all the 35
constituencies just for the sake of it.
The May 1977 general elections were held as scheduled. The ruling People’s
Progressive Party filed candidates in all the 35 constituencies. The National
Convention Party filed 31 candidates. The National Liberation Party coalition
filed 5 candidates. The PPP won 27 seats, the NCP 5 seats and the U.P/NLP
came out with 2 seats clearly paving way to Jawara’s PPP to form a government.
The state of the parties before and after the elections was as follows;
1962 1966 1972 1977
PPP 22 24 26 27
UP 9 8 3 2
NCP - - - 5
Mark you by 1977, the seats in parliament were increased from 32 to 35
seats. There were only two independent candidates in the 1977 general elections,
Mr. Omar Mbake and Mr. Lamin Waa Juwara, each of whom did not link themselves
to any of the contending presidential candidates. They also did not win their
seats although I have noted from records that Mr. Waa Juwara had polled
almost neck and neck with the PPP candidate Mr. Saikou Sabally, who had won. It
was also observed that even though Mr. Juwara had not linked himself with Sir
Dawda at the time, his relation as claimed by him as nephew was said to have
helped him greatly. It was also noted that when the PPP campaigners on the
ground in Sabach Sanjal constituency noticed that public opinion was on the side
of Mr. Juwara, they had to call the president himself to intervene which he
did, which helped Mr. Sabally to win. It was equally noticed that Mr. Juwara’
s win would have been a forgone conclusion if Mr. Pap Cheyassin Secka and Mr.
S.M Sabally under the NCP had not stood there at the time. Sir Dawda now
Alhagie Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara was sworn in as president. Mr. Sheriff M. Dibba
then became leader of the opposition in the 1977 House of Representatives.
History has also recorded that Mr. Kukoi Samba Sanyang also stood as a
candidate in the 1977 general election for Eastern Foni under the banner of the
NCP.
The NCP won Bakau with Bakary B. Camara, a very dynamic character,
Serrekunda West with Mr. Gibou Jagne, who left the U.P, Central Badibu with Mr. S.M
Dibba albeit with a lower margin, Lower Badibu with Mr. Foday Makalo and
Illiasa with Mr. Fodeba B. Jammeh.
Two bye-elections ensued all of which were won by the PPP increasing their
majority from 27 to 30 seats in parliament. They were Mr. J.R Forster of
Banjul Central and Mr. Momodou M. Taal of Banjul South. As far as the Local
Government was concerned, the President reserved the power to dissolve them when
and how he wished. The PPP simply left the laws governing councils as the
colonialists coined it. This was why Sir Dawda dissolved the Banjul City Council
who were directly elected by the people and appointed an interim committee to
run the affairs of the capital. He did this on the pretext that the previous
council had proved unequal to the task in 1970. Banjulians complained and made
protestations to no avail.
According to the Government owned Information and Broadcasting Booklet, it
was not until mid 1979 that elections for Councils were allowed so that Banjul
City Council had elected representatives as well as a mayor, Mr. Salieu Foon.
The Kanifing Urban District Council was then attached to Brikama Area
Council, but by 1979, it has been made completely independent of Brikama Area
Council.
Earlier on in the column, I have mentioned the fear that Gambia may or may
not be one party state after the 1977 elections. Many questions were raised to
that end but Sir Dawda eventually clarified his government’s policy on it;
saying things would be left as they were, meaning a multi-party state. But
went on to add that, “Unless the electorate themselves decide the question,
meaning refusing to vote for a single opposition to the house of parliament.
According to the information booklet on the 15 years of independence, the
electorate despite giving increasingly overwhelming majorities in the House of
Representatives to the ruling PPP, it has shown a reluctance to endorse a one
party house.
Economically, the PPP felt comfortable at least as far as their propaganda
was concerned. They had struggled a lot to make the people believe that The
Gambia was a country that was not given a chance to survive economically as an
independent nation. The National Media which was reserved for the PPP and its
government, alone continued to show what they considered as impressive. They
used to cite investments in the fields of transport (GPTC) and
communications, in Agriculture and Social Services. The first ten years was cited as been
years of growth and consolidation when according to the Information Booklet,
the goal of economic viability loomed larger on the horizon but was
accomplished successfully and the decision to become independent has proved to be the
correct thing to have been done in 1965.
The economy by 1977 was not in good shape if we are to look at it from an
objective point of view. Groundnut was the mainstay of The Gambian economy
since pre-independence, but the production of groundnut in 1977 was only 82,221
tons and only about 22,000 tonnes was actually bought from the farmers. If one
compared this figure with that of say 1964/65, production was at 90,953 tons
and more than 33,000 tons was actually bought from farmers. It was even
highest in 1973/74 when the farmers produced 136,000 tons.
Secondly if one observe and compare the Imports, Exports and the balance of
visible Trade, one would come to notice that Gambia was importing more from
the outside than it was exporting. For example, 1964/65, imports amounted to
D25,182 but exports stood at D23,747. So the deficit or balance of visible
trade was only D1,436. If that is compared to 1977/78, when imports stood at
D209,094 and total exports stood at D80,329, the deficit rose to the
astronomical sum of over D127,800 dalasis. Mark you this was at a time when the dalasi
was linked to the British pound, so it was very strong.
So as you can see, for both groundnut production and exports, Gambia was
experiencing short falls. This had become the trend since then.
Despite the economic reality, Government was bent on proving to the people
that it could solve the rising demand of education in the country. Jawara had
also promised in his campaign that he was going to eradicate unemployment
when he wins the 1977 elections. “There will not be a single boy and girl who
will be without something” he was heard saying. Many began to see the fruits of
education, Western education for that matter. The fear of one’s child being
transformed or converted to Christianity was being eroded and the need for
education rising.
So what did it do? It encouraged a new philosophy called “Tesito,” meaning
to tighten our belts, which literally means to struggle. So people in many
rural villages began to struggle to build Makeshift structures and called them
schools. But Government does not have the required trained or even untrained
teachers to cope with the problem.
This was also done with a new regulation making education free but
non-compulsory. So many children flocked to school but learning materials and even
furniture were not sufficient, thereby forcing parents to make their furniture
and buy books for their children. This was the first time people see children
carrying stools and chairs to schools. The economy was showing signs of
collapse forcing the government to take more loans making the little country more
and more indebted.
Since investments in the industrial sector were almost non existent, the
army of the unemployed was also swelling mainly by school leavers and dropouts.
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY RATIFIES THE
GAMBIA-VENEZUELA AGREEMENT
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
Deputies at the National Assembly in a special session on Thursday, April
12, unanimously ratified the Framework Agreement on cooperation between the
government of the Gambia and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
Moving the motion before the parliamentarians, the Secretary of State for
Higher Education Mr. Crispin Grey- Johnson, said the agreement was signed last
year when the Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez attended the African Union
Summit held in The Gambia.
Mr. Grey-Johnson also said that the agreement is a testimony of the good
will of the two countries, adding that it is aimed at strengthening relationship
in the areas of agriculture, health, education, petroleum, energy and
infrastructure.
The motion was seconded by the member for Kombo North, Adama Cham. The
cooperation stipulated in this agreement will be carried out in the following
development sectors: energy, economy, agriculture, social, education, cultural,
military and any other sector that may be agreed upon by the parties.
The parties shall adopt complementary legal instruments, which included the
following; the objectives to be attained or reached, the work agenda, the
obligations of each party, the financing and the bodies responsible for their
implementation.
The agreement also states that both parties shall promote cooperation
between the institutions, public and or private enterprises in their respective
countries, as well as, the participation of civil society, in conformity with
their respective internal regulations.
For the implementation and follow up of this agreement, the parties shall
create a Joint International Committee, which shall comprise representatives of
both governments. It shall be presided over by the Ministers of Foreign
Affairs of both countries and shall meet every two years, alternatively in the
Gambia and Venezuela, at dates to be agreed upon by the two parties.
According to the agreement, the joint committee will establish working
groups in different fields of cooperation. The agreement is valid for a period of
five years, renewable automatically for the same period unless one of the
parties provides notification in writing, through diplomatic channels, six
months in advance of its intention to denounce it. And the denunciation will be
effective six months after the date of the notification. It was signed in the
Gambia on July 2nd, 2006.
COUNSEL CROSS EXAMINES ASP CEESAY IN JOURNALIST FATTY’S CASE
By Fabakary B. Ceesay
During cross examination, Defense Counsel, Lamin S. Camara, asked ASP Ceesay
whether he personally investigated Samba Bah and obtained a statement from
him. ASP Ceesay replied that he investigated Mr. Bah but did not obtain a
statement from him but that he instructed that order. He said that Mr. Bah did
not complain personally to the police but that during their investigations, a
statement was obtained from him. Ceesay indicated that he met the accused
person at the police headquarters but that he could not tell when and how many
times he met him. Ceesay added that he cannot remember who arrested the accused
person. He said that a cautionary and a voluntary statement was obtained
from the accused by Sergeant Lamin Cham. He said he did not remember when and
where the statement was taken. He said that he instructed the arrest of the
accused person but that he was not present when a statement was obtained from
him. When asked where the accused person was detained after his arrest. He said
that he knew he was detained at the police headquarters in Banjul. He added
that at one time, he knew that the accused person was taken to the NIA but
cannot tell who took him there. “I’m putting it to you that the accused person
was detained for 63 days” said Camara. “I can’t remember that” said
Ceesay. Mr. Ceesay indicated that Samba Bah did say that he knew the accused person
was the author of the story. He was then given the statement of Samba Bah to
read where Samba indicated that the accused person was the author of the
publication. He said that he could not find that in the statement. He asserted
that he cannot remember seeing the accused person in his office on May 11 and
in June 2006. He added that he could not see any date on the column of the
independent witness on Exhibit B. “Would you be surprised to know that there
was no independent witness when Exhibit B was taken” asked Camara. “As far as
the procedure is concerned all statements must be taken in the presence of an
independent witness. To what I belief, there was an independent witness
present. He said that he is very sure the matter was handled by a competent
officer. Mr. Ceesay was given the Independent Newspaper to read at the bottom of
the page where the name of the publisher of the paper was mentioned. He read
that it was “published by the Independent Media Company Limited” and the
printer as “Eagle Publishing Services” Camara asked, “Is it correct that Exhibit
A is not published by the accused person.” Ceesay replied, “It was not
published by the accused person but by the Independent Media Company Limited.” He
added that Exhibit A1 (newspaper) contained a rejoinder captioned “I am not
arrested,” adding that was also published by The Independent Media Company
Limited.
ASP Ceesay agreed that there is no name of a reporter on that caption, (“I’
m Not Arrested”), but he said that near that caption there is a name of one
Sulayman Makalo near it. Camara told the witness that he is referring to the
caption “I am not arrested.” Ceesay said, “there is no name under that
caption.” Camara asked him to read the caption by Sulayman Makalo, which he read as
thus; “Mickey Mouse statements.” Camara asked whether the statement, “I am
not arrested is a continuation of the “Mickey Mouse statement.” Witness said
they are not but they are all on the same face of the newspaper. Camara then
asked him whether the caption “foil coup looms” was also written by
Sulayman Makalo. Witness said, it could be because there is no name of the reporter
on that page except Makalo and Gaye.” “Is any person by the name Samba Bah
arrested in connection to the coup?” ASP Ceesay said, “Yes but not the former
SoS but a private soldier.
Counsel Camara told the court that they are ready to open their defence by
the next one witness that is the accused himself. He told the court that, he
wanted to submit a no case to answer. So far the prosecution has closed their
case.
INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE SPEAKS OUT
By Annia Gaye
Pa Sainey Jallow, the defeated independent candidate for Serrekunda East on
the 25 January National Assembly Election has stated that, National Assembly
members (NAMs) are elected to serve the interest of the people in the country.
Mr. Jallow was speaking in an exclusive interview with Foroyaa on Tuesday 10
April 2007. He noted that the National Assembly is a forum where all
Gambians cannot sit and discuss issues and come to conclusion. And that’s why a body
is elected to represent the people and also serve their interest. He further
noted that the National Assembly is a lawmaking body and urged NAMs to make
good laws in order to benefit the nation. He mentioned that the whole work of
the National Assembly lies in the hands of the old ones who have been
serving for five years. He said lots of promises have been made by the NAMs but
only hoped that they would meet expectation; “if not 90%” but at least 75% and
urged them to deliver in favour of the people. He said that although he lost
the election, the struggle would continue.
Gratitude
He congratulated people who have supported him morally and financially in
the election. He expressed his gratitude to the committee who selected him to
stand as an independent candidate for Serrekunda East as well as the campaign
committee, who he said have been helping him tirelessly. He thanked the
entire media fraternity who were disseminating information to the people and said
journalists are the promoters of politicians and others in the world. “I hate
somebody who embarrasses a journalist,” he concluded.
URR NAMS AND COUNCILLORS COULD NOT MEET
By Lamin Fatty
Reports have it that the proposed meeting organised by the National Assembly
Members and the Authorities of the Basse Area Council in URR, in an effort
to discuss the issue on their decision to sell the Trust Bank Complex in
Basse, did not take place because councillors failed to turn up.
According to sources neither the chairman nor the Local Government Officer
could be seen at the scheduled meeting. Speaking to this reporter at his Basse
residence, Honourable Sellu Bah, member for Basse, said that five NAMs
attended the failed meeting, namely Honourable Sidia Jatta, Hon. Bekai Camara.
Hon. Mama Kandeh, Hon. Abdoulie Kanaji Jawla and Sellu Bah him -self. He pointed
out that Hon. Netty Baldeh and Hon. Saikou Suso, member for Kantora who was
one time a vice chairman at Basse Area Council were the two NAMs who did not
attend the meeting. He stated that there are plans to convene a meeting to
which the entire general public will be invited. He promised to shed more light
on the outcome of the meeting.
When contacted, the NAM for Wuli West Hon. Sidia Jatta also said that the
proposed meeting was boycotted by the council members; that the NAMs went to
the proposed meeting because they wrote to the council Authorities that they
were to have a meeting and since they never said that they were going to
boycott the meeting they went ahead with it. He said they are National Assembly
Members and the National Assembly is an over sight institution, meaning they can
challenge any state decision. Asked what step is next, the member for Wuli
East said they are going to wait until all the NAM’s in URR meet, and then they
will see what steps to take about the issue.
Readers could recall that authorities at the Basse Area Council were
supposed to have a meeting with the NAM’s in URR about their alleged decision to
sell the Trust Bank Complex in Basse which is owned by the council. However the
meeting was not possible since the Authorities failed to attend.
COURT MARTIAL
DEFENCE FAULTS PROSECUTION’S CASE
Lamin Camara, counsel for Captain Bunja Darboe, Captain Abdoukarim Jah,
Captain Pierre Mendy and Lieutenant Momodou Alieu Bah has faulted the prosecution’
s case in the on going court martial.
The learned counsel has urged the court to acquit and discharge his clients
on all the charges preferred against them for the prosecution’s failure to
prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Camara’s submission is contained in a
written address filed at the court martial.
Camara indicated that the prosecution called ten witnesses to prove the
charges leveled against the accused persons. He said in a criminal trial of this
magnitude and gravity, the law had laid down some minimum benchmarks which
have to be met in order to secure a conviction.
For Captain Bunja Darboe, he said the law requires that for count one to be
sustainable against him. The elements, in fact all the ingredients will have
to be proven. He further submitted that the court requires that there must be
cogent evidence to show that Captain Darboe (the first accused) counseled or
procured people to commit mutiny. In his view, there is no iota of evidence
from all the prosecution witnesses that any mutiny was in the offing. He
noted that section 35 (1)(3) is not the offence creating section for the charge
as stated in count one and is therefore not sustainable. According to him, the
definition of mutiny is contained in section 2 of the Gambia Armed Forces
Act.
On count two, the learned counsel submitted that the statement of offence in
count two is not in consonance with the particulars of offence.
“the reason is that in count two, the first accused person (Bunja Darboe) is
charged with three others for the offence of causing or conspiring with
others to cause mutiny contrary to section 4 (7)(b) of The Gambia Armed Forces
Act. On the other hand, the particulars of offence are a narrations that
explain the offence of conspiracy to overthrow, to wit coup d’etat. Thus the
charge as laid out in count two is materially defective which cannot be cured at
this moment in time. My Lord this defect is the cause of the uncertainty as to
what the accused person is charged with and should be struck out. My Lord,
it is trite law that a charge should and must be laid out as near as possible
to the language contained in the penal code.
However, where two possible offences are contained in the legislation/penal
code, the charge should be framed in such a way as to precisely and
categorically tell the accused person what exactly is he or she being charged with.
Thus I submit that in count two, “causing or conspiring…..” cannot be in the
alternative. It can only be either or, that is causing or conspiring. Only one
of this two adjective should be contained in this charge. My Lord, the same
argument goes for the statement of offence as laid out in count one and is
similarly materially defective. Thus I urge this court to strike out count one
too for being uncertain,” he remarked.
The learned counsel relied on the case of R vs. MOLLOY (1921) 2K.B. 364 and
the case of R vs CAIN and others. He also relied on the case of R vs. WILMOT
(1933) 29 COX 652 to support his argument.
On count three, the learned counsel said, “there is no need for recourse to
chambers dictionary for the definition of mutiny, it is thoroughly defined in
section 2 thereto and quoted supra. It is preposterous for anyone to suggest
even in the slightest that the Commander-in-Chief in the person of a
civilian president is a military officer, thus section 61 (1) and 188 (2) of the
1997 Constitution does not avail the prosecution to prove the charge of mutiny.
In fact, no such mutiny took place in the entire evidence of all the
prosecution witnesses.
On count five, Camara noted that Captain Bunja Darboe with three others are
also charged with treason contrary to section 35 (1) (a) of the criminal
Code. He said apart from the cautionary statement of the accused person. Exhibit
T, U and AB, no credible evidence was led to substantiate or corroborate the
allegations of treason. He said the only prosecution witness to testify on
procurement, counseling and treason is PW8, Captain Seckan. He submitted that
Seckan allegedly testified as to the conversation that took place between him
and the first accused. He said the testimony of Seckan is highly suspect and
should be taken with a pinch of salt. He said, “the testimony is highly
unreliable for many reasons;
1. The witness lied under oath when he said that he was not arrested, but
put under protective custody.
2. That he contradicted himself and said under cross examination that “Yes
I am the first person to be arrested.”
3. That he took out two candles from inside his table drawer to offer as
charity for the success of the alleged coup.
4. That he wrote both cautionary and voluntary statements.
5. He is a tainted witness.
6. His evidence has a purpose to serve in that he was promoted to the rank
of Captain after March 21st, 2006.
Furthermore and even most importantly, the charge of treason requires a
mandatory corroboration under section 38 of the criminal code cap 10 volume 111
of the laws of the Gambia and it states; “A person charged under section 35,
36 and 37 of this code shall not be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony
of one witness.”
Camara pointed out that Captain Seckan’s testimony is not reliable. He
further pointed out that the exhibits tendered in the cause of the entire trial
are not sources of independent corroboration either, in particular exhibit M.
He said the first accused person in the voire dire (trial within trial)
vividly testified to the inhuman and brutal acts of torture at the hands of the
state security agents to the point of breaking his hand to secure a confession
and Exhibit H (the alleged coup statement) allegedly found in the office
file of the first accused by PW1 Abdoulie Sowe, Detective 1203 Boto Keita, PW9
Lamin Cham and PW10 Nfally Jabang are a figment of their own imagination with
respect to the discovery of Exhibit H.
He added that the statements from all the prosecution witnesses are
concocted and not supported by any evidence, in particular the diary of action,
Exhibit Q and R did not contain the said discovery.
In addition, PW10 Nfally Jabang also said he would not know if the said
Exhibit H left the investigation panel at anytime. My Lord it is common knowledge
that Exhibit M were both aired on The Gambia Radio and Television Services
as attested to by the accused,” he remarked.
Camara further stated that the prosecution is left grouping and fumbling in
the dark recesses of the prosecution evidence for any source of corroboration.
“My Lord, there is none and therefore count five fails woefully. My Lord,
the burden of proof in criminal prosecution is not accomplished by the quality
of the prosecution witness, but by the quality and cogency thereof. This is
what is lacking in the state/prosecution case,” he remarked.
On count six, Camara said the conspiracy charge preferred against Captain
Bunja Darboe is not also supported by any cogent evidence to warrant the court
to convict on it. He said the main trust of prosecution evidence to prove
this charge of conspiracy to commit treason is predominantly the cautionary
statement.
“My Lord, a charge of conspiracy to overthrow a democratically elected
government must be supported by independent testimony of truthful witnesses.
Conspiracy presupposes the meeting of the minds of all the accused persons, namely
1st accused Captain Bunja Darboe, 2nd accused Captain Yaya Darboe, 3rd
accused Captain Wassa Camara and 4th accused Lieutenant Pharing Sanyang for an
illegal enterprise. It is my submission that no evidence has been led of any
conspirational enterprise between 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th accused persons.”
“My Lord what actually transpired between former Chief of Defence Staff,
Colonel Ndure Cham and any other accused person cannot be the basis of an
inference for conspiracy between the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th accused persons. The
prosecution sought to rely on Exhibit N and N1, an alleged tape recording of
the meetimg that took place between Corporal Mbaye Gaye and Colonel Ndure Cham.
This Exhibit is very unhelpful to the court as it has not been listened to.
However, Corporal Mbaye Gaye himself stated that he recorded his conversation
with Colonel Ndure Cham. There is no mention of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th
accused person in the testimony of Corporal Mbaye Gaye. However, assuming with
conceding that they are mentioned, the court did not listen to the tape and
could not know what is on it. The court cannot and should not be asked to go
on a voyage of discovery on its own. The onus is on the state to provide the
evidence for the charge. My Lord, the evidence of a co-accused with respect
to any allegation contained in the charge in particular, their statement
cannot be the source of the conspiracy theory. The statement of the accused
person is admissible against himself and himself only,” he said.
He stated that section 32 (2) of the Evidence Act is particularly relevant
and applicable here and it reads;
“Where more persons than one are charged jointly with a criminal offence and
a confession by one of such persons in the presence of one or more of the
other persons so charged is given in evidence, the court shall not take such
statement as against any such other person in whose presence it was made unless
any of such other persons adopted the said statements by words or conduct.”
He remarked, “the prosecution in an attempt to proof the conspiracy
theory/charge against the first accused belaboured on evidence which is even
circumstantial, that is, the fact that Captain Wassa Camara, the 3rd accused went to
the Abuko Earth Station. My Lord, conspiracy cannot be proven by the activity
of an individual alone.”
He said for the actions of the accused persons to amount to conspiracy, they
must have agreed to execute the illegal unlawful enterprise to wit, coup d’
etat.
See next edition of Foroyaa for the continuation of the story. We will try
to lay hand on the prosecution and defence counsel’s submission for the next
edition of this paper.
Bakau United Hold Real, Seaview Pip Biko
By Musa Barrow
Struggling Bakau United held Real de Banjul to a goalless draw on Saturday,
at the Banjul playing grounds.
The embattled Bakau side earned their second point in the ongoing GFA
division 1 league thanks to a spirited fight led by star striker Daddy Gai, who
rejoined the team after attending trials in Norway. United could have even
grabbed all three had they maintained the right footing in front of goal.
Real started the game well pushing for an early upset and undoubtedly they
could have killed the match in the first half had they utilised their chances.
Pa Landing Conateh was the main man for Real up front out pacing the United
defenders, but playing their first match after sacking their coach, Bakau
United was determined not to buckle so easily.
When the teams changed sides for the second period, Bakau United turned the
heat over to Real and twice went clear only to be denied by the Real keeper.
And as Real skipper struggled to keep hold of the ball and do his running the
United defence was always at him with hard tackles. When the referee blew
the final whistle, Real’s coach Sira Ndoye held his head between his hands
feeling disappointed with the final results of the match.
At the Serrekunda East grounds between Bakau United and Sea view, the
division 1 newcomers bettered on the day with a 1-0 win. Steve Biko still without a
win since the commencement of the league season, are third on the lower
rankings of the league table with five draws in six matches.
Bottrop and Pakalinding Seal Interschool Athletics
By Modou Nyang
Bottrop Senior Secondary emerged victorious in the senior schools category
of the annual interschool athletics championship held at the Independence
Stadium in Bakau. And Pakalinding Upper Basic School repeated their 2006 feat
clinching top spot in the Junior Schools category.
The two day finals of the biggest athletic gathering in the country saw the
Brikama School again break the almost eternal hegemonic grip of the popular
inter-school’s by those in the Greater area, sealing the most coveted prize in
school sport. Bottrop collected a total of 319 points fishing nine points
ahead of Gambia Senior Secondary who finished with 310 points. Muslim Senior
Secondary School finished third with a total of 234 points.
Pakalinding Upper Basic School in the junior school category garnered a
total of 225 points and is followed by Abuko Upper Basic School in second with
182 points. The masters in the junior schools category Latrikunda Upper Basic
(LK) managed third spot with 182 points one behind Abuko.
Issue No. 44/2007, 18 - 19 April 2007
Editorial
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE GAMBIA
Part 2
In Part 1, we mentioned the closure of The Independent, Citizen FM and SUD
FM. We cited provisions in the constitution which protect freedom of
expression and the independence of the press and other information media. We also
cited a provision of the constitution which gives the media responsibility to
uphold “the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people.”
It is clear from these provisions that an Executive cannot be said to have a
good record of freedom of speech and expression if it keeps locking up
journalists and closing media houses. It cannot be said to be a respecter of
freedom of speech and expression if it is intolerant to criticisms and divergent
views.
A democratic minded leader listens to criticisms and takes them as
challenges, not as insults or security threats, even when they are ill motivated. On
the other hand, a monarchically minded leader or tyrant takes pleasure in
praises by psychophants, but reads motives in every criticism and marks critics
as enemies. He or she uses judicial and extra judicial measures to silence
critics and opponents.
Since everyone is afraid to speak the truth, the lies of the psycho pant
holds sway and the tyrant loses sight of the reality.
Criticism or scrutiny of the government in power is necessary in a
democratic society. It keeps a government on its toes and facilitates better
performance through efforts to avoid errors. Criticism is just like soap and water
used for cleansing.
The media is regarded as the fourth estate with responsibility to uphold “
the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people.” How can
such tasks be performed if citizens cannot express themselves freely; if one
can land himself/herself in jail for expressing the view that a government
is hopeless and needs replacement?
A vibrant media is an essential component of a democratic society, since
without it democracy cannot have the desired effect.
Democracy cannot be limited to merely electing representatives periodically,
especially, when such representatives turn out to be demagogues and elites
who drain the resources of the country for their selfish ends and oppress the
people.
“FATOU JAW MANNEH, DAME OF THE FLAMING PEN”
Says Witness
By Fabakary B. Ceesay
The NIA officer, (name withheld) testifying in the much publicized sedition
trial of Fatou Jaw Manneh, has told the court that the article extracted from
the internet, bearing Fatou Jaw Manneh’s names states, “Fatou Jaw Manneh,
dame of the flaming pen.”
The NIA told the court that on the 29th of March 2006, the accused herself
printed the article from her postings at the (google) internet. He said that
the article contained her own name as the author. He said that the accused has
also visited her email address to check for some of her articles but that
there was no article there. He said that the same article was given to him as
part of the case file. He noted that he downloaded the same laptop and
compared the hard copy with the others and later certified it by himself.
He recognised the said article in court. The prosecution wanted to tender
the article but defence objected.
Counsel Lamin Jobarteh, said that his objection was based on a view of non
compliance. He quoted section 22 of the Evidence Act concerning statements
printed from computers. He argued that a proper foundation has not been laid
before the court with regards to the said articles. He cited sections 22 (1) and
22(2) of the Evidence Act. He said that a foundation shall be laid to
certify the documents from a computer or any other devices. He argued that there
was no proper foundation and the conditions about the articles has not been
fulfilled. He therefore urged the court to reject it outright.
The State Counsel Emmanuel Fagbenle reminded the court that the witness
testified that the accused person herself downloaded the document from the
computer of an investigating officer. He said that the document was certified by
the witness and recognised it in court. He explained that an item recovered
during the course of an investigation is admissible. He added that the document
was acknowledged by the accused person that it was downloaded from a
functional computer. “The objection lacks strength,” he challenged. E.O. Fagbenle
lamented that the testimony from the witness has complied regularly to section
22 of Evidence Act. He said that there are manners of information that comes
from a computer, either they are letters or emails and that all those manners
are of professionals. He added that it does not apply to make sure that all
documents from the computers are to be certified. He emphasised that yahoo
and google were functioning and that was why the information was loaded from
there. He asserted that the manner of the document sought to be tendered
confirms the original course of transactions, that computers are the means to
access internet, either by yahoo or google. “The document sought to be tendered
was certified and stamped and it has complied with the law and it is relevant.
The witness is a competent person. I urge this court to accept the document as
an exhibit” he lamented.
Defence Counsel Jobarteh also cited the Law of Evidence Justice H. Jallow.
He said that the witness cannot certify the document apart from either a
notary public or Commissioner for Oath. Jobarteh said that under the exclusive
rule of interpretation, where a rule under a certain issue intended to form
part, a law needs to certify a document. He said that if certain issues are
exception, then law makers must have said so.
“There is no where in the law, especially under the jurisdiction, even from
the commonwealth, that overrides a statute. The only known law that can
override the statute is the supreme law. The document sought to be tendered needs
to be rejected,” he urged.
Magistrate Jawo ruled that under section 3 of Evidence Act 1994, documents
concerning computers need to be certified. He said that there were no doubts
that the document sought to be tendered is relevant to the procedure of the
trial. He therefore admitted the document and marked it as exhibit B.
Continuing his testimony, the witness told the court that, he at one point
struck out the words, “I reserve my opinion till I consult a lawyer, on one of
the exhibits. He said that he was asked by the accused to do so because,
according to him, the accused told him that she did not know whether to consult
a lawyer or defend herself. When asked about his knowledge of the Deyda Hydara
incident, the NIA officer said that their office received information that
Deyda Hydara was gunned down by unknown gunmen. He said that an investigating
panel was setup regarding the incident. He noted that during the
investigation somebody was suspected whose house was searched. He also said that the
April 10-11 2000 incident was also investigated. At this point hearing was
adjourned till Friday 20 April, for further hearing.
FLOUR IN THE MARKET UNDER INVESTIGATION
By Amie Sanneh
Reports reaching Foroyaa have it that a private owned business company (name
withheld) in the country has distributed flour in the market which is said
to be unfit for human consumption.
The report stated that the said company imported a consignment of 15,000
bags of flour into the country and so far 10,000 bags are already out in the
market.
According to the report the flour is said to be caking and infested with
beetles.
When the health authorities were contacted, the head of Food Hygiene and
Safety Unit, Momodou Lamin Nget, described the report as baseless.
He confirmed the 15,000 bags of flour imported in the country from the said
company but said no single bag is out in the market. It is apparent from a
letter that some bags were in the market.
“As far as this office is concerned the story is unfounded,” he remarked.
Mr. Nget explained that due to the way bags of flour are being packed, those
at the base are bound to be caked or mouldy.
He said the issue of the flour has been going on since November 2006 and
that was the time the said company wrote a letter to the Permanent Secretary of
Health for the Inspection of the flour.
Mr. Nget added that that was the time they assigned three officers to go to
the warehouse of the said company and inspect the flour. “The flour is not
yet distributed, it is being supervised by our officers at the warehouse,” he
noted.
Mr. Nget pointed out that this exercise is ongoing and the officers are
trying to separate the good ones from the bad ones, if there is any. “The good
ones will be distributed and the bad ones will be destroyed,” he said. Our
source indicated that this process is wrong.
Mr. Nget posited that samples of the flour have been collected already to be
taken to the laboratory.
“My officers are ensuring that any food to be distributed to the people is
fit for human consumption,” Mr. Nget remarked.
When the said company was contacted to confirm the story, an insider
described the story as untrue. He said their company has been here for years and has
never had any such problem. “We will not jeopardize our company,” he said.
The flour, he noted, is not yet out in the market and is being supervised by
health authorities to identify the good flour from the bad ones.
“We can’t sell anything. Its all under health, nobody can touch it, health
will check and see if its good or not before it can be sold,” he remarked.
The Police Spokesperson ASP Famara Jobarteh was contacted as the case has
also reached the Police.
PRO Jobarteh told this reporter in a telephone call that his people are
investigating the case and cannot give any information to journalists until when
they are through with their investigation.
NIA OFFICER FACES CORRUPTION AND OTHER CHARGES
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
Lamin (Mandas) Fatty, a personnel of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA)
was on Tuesday April 17, arraigned before Magistrate Amina Saho on charges of
extortion by threats, official corruption and neglect of official duty, which
are contrary to sections 277 (a), 86 (a), and 113 of thee Criminal Code
respectively.
According to the particulars of offence, in count one, on or about the month
of January in Kotu, he threatened to accuse Momodou Faye of forgery, and
induce him (Faye) to deliver up the sum of two hundred thousand (200,000) CFA
francs.
Count two states that in the same month and place, being employed in the
public service and being charged with the duty to arrest offenders, he corruptly
obtained the sum of 200, 000 CFA francs from Cherno Sey and Yusupha Jobe,
all reasonably suspected to have committed an offence in the discharge of the
duties of his office. The particulars of the offence on count three also said
that in the same venue and period and being in the public service, he
willfully neglected to arrest and hand over for persecution, Cherno Sey and Yusupha
Jobe on reasonable suspicion of committing an offence, a duty which he is
bound by law to perform.
Fatty has pleaded not guilty to all the three charges preferred against him.
He is expected to reappear at the Bundung Magistrate Court on May 19..
DETECTIVE APPEARS IN AZZIZ TAMBA AND CO. TRIAL
By Bubacarr K. Sowe
A detective officer, name withheld, on Monday appeared in the 19 million
dalasi theft case of three ex-employees of the Kanilai Farm.
The officer told the court that after doing the counting, he realised that
about 19 million dalasi was missing.
He said that he contacted two of the accused persons, Nfamara Colley and
Mustapha Bojang but they responded that they do not know how the money went
missing.
The witness added that at money times Aziz Tamba, also an accused person,
will go or send somebody for money without signing for it and with the pretext
that he was sent by the president.
In a brief cross-examination, Aziz Tamba put to the witness that he has
never known him before.
Meanwhile, the prosecution has closed its case and the defendants will open
theirs on April 19th before Magistrate Pa Harry Jammeh at the Kanifing
Magistrate Court.
COURT MARTIAL
DEFENCE FAULTS PROSECUTION’S CASE
PART 2
Lamin Camara, Counsel for Captain Bunja Darboe, Captain Pierre Mendy,
Captain Abdoukarim Jah and Lieutenant Momodou Alieu Bah had told the Honourable
Court Martial that the prosecution in the ongoing criminal case against his
clients had endeavoured very hard to willingly proof the charges preferred
against his clients and corroborate it with the most unconventional sources of
evidence of corroborative value. Camara made this submission in a 26 page
written address filed at the court.
Lawyer Camara reminded the court that Captain Pierre John Mendy, Captain
Abdoukarim Jah and Lientenant Momodou Alieu Bah are all charged with failure to
report mutiny contrary to section 47 (e) of The Gambia Armed Forces Act,
concealment of treason contrary to section 36 (a) of the Criminal Code and
concealment of treason contrary to section 36 (b) of the Criminal Code. The
definition of mutiny in section 2 of the Gambia Armed Forces Act means; “a
combination of two or more persons subject to this Act or between two persons at least
one of whom is subject to this Act”
(a). “To overthrow or resist lawful authority in the Armed Forces
cooperating therewith or any part thereof”
(b). “ To disobey such authority in such circumstance as to make subversive
of discipline, or with the object of avoiding any duty or service against or
in connection with operation against the enemy; or”
(c ). “To impede the performance of any duty or service in the Armed Forces
or any Forces cooperating therewith or any part thereof”
On count four, Mr. Camara submitted that the charge is preferred against
Captain Mendy, Captain Jah and Lieutenant Bah. He said in the entire gamut of
the trial, there is no knowledge of any mutiny or knowledge of mutiny imputed
to the aforesaid accused persons. He said none of the witnesses testified to
any mutiny among the Army.
He said, “knowledge is a condition for concealment as one cannot conceal
anything that is not within his or her knowledge. The count thus fails.” On
counts seven and eight, Camara said the charge of concealment of treason in count
seven is not supported by any plausible evidence to warrant a conviction. He
argued that none of the witnesses testified that Captain Pierre Mendy,
Captain Abdoukarim Jah and Lientenant Momodou Alieu Bah had any knowledge of
treason being planned by anybody. He said Mendy and Jah disassociated from their ca
utionary statements which the prosecution seeks to rely upon to prove this
charge on the ground that it is involuntary.
“The fifth accused person’s (Captain Jah) confessional statement, Exhibit
Y, was not witnessed by an independent witness as is evident from the
different dates on the statement. The statement, Exhibit Y, is of little or no
probative value and the court martial should not rely on it for any evidentiary
purpose. In the circumstances, therefore, count seven fails against the fifth
accused person. Unlike the fifth accused person, the sixth accused person,
Captain Pierre John Mendy entered his defence and testified under Oath and even
subjected himself to the cross examination of the prosecution. This evidence
is cogent, consistent, reliable and truthful. He was at no time informed by
any one of the alleged coup, but was forced to write that he was informed by
RSM Alpha Bah. However, RSM Alpha Bah, the alleged originator of the
information is at large and has not testified to that effect, thus there is no
independent corroboration of the statement of the accused person, assuming without
conceding that the court is reminded to relying on it. Thus, in the premises,
this charge falls flat and remains unproven. The 7th accused person, Momodou
Alieu Bah, made it categorically clear, not withstanding the circumstances
under which his cautionary statement, Exhibit W, was written and that he did
inform some people about the alleged coup. Unlike accused persons fifth and
sixth, he told one Mr. Jatta, the orderly to Colonel Cham and Abba Badjie of
the Military Intelligence and Lieutenant Solomon Jammeh, the very same day in
the premises. Therefore counts seven and eight fall against the 7th accused
person, 2nd Lieutenant Momodou Alieu Bah. The 7th accused had used a “
reasonable endeavour” to prevent commission of the offence by informing a superior
military intelligence who is in better stead to nip the activity in the bud.
He could not afford to be a passive bystander and watch. On the other hand,
the fifth accused person, Captain Aboukarim Jah, and the sixth accused person,
Captain Pierre Mendy, were not informed at all. They had no notion or clue,
not even the slightest of the alleged treasonable offence of an impending
planned coup d’etat. My lord, I urge this Honourable Court to acquit and
discharge the 5th, 6th and 7th accused persons on the 7th and 8th charges for the
prosecution’s dismal failure to proof them beyond reasonable doubt,” he said.
The learned counsel cited the decision of the Court of Appeal of Enugu
Division in Basil Ikwunne and Others Vs the Sate (2005) VOL LRCNCC 269 held on
what the prosecution must prove to sustain a charge of conspiracy;
“In a charge of conspiracy, the prosecution has the burden to prove not only
the incholate or rudimentary nature of the offence, but also the persons
with a common intention and purpose to commit a particular offence.”
Camara said in the case of EDET OKONKWO VS THE STATE (2002) 3 LRCNCC 15 PAGE
18, it was held that: “Evidence in corroboration must be independent
testimony direct or circumstantial, which confirms in some material particular not
only has an offence been committed, but that the accused has committed it.”
He said quite apart from the lack of corroboration from the prosecution
witnesses, the evidence of the said witnesses are materially inconsistent. He
said the material discrepancies entitled the accused person to an acquittal in
the case. He said in the case of EDET OKONKO VS THE STATE, it was held that; “
it is now well settled that the contradictions on the evidence of witness for
the prosecution to affect conviction, they must be sufficient to raise doubt
as to the guilt of the accused person.”
“There are material inconsistencies in the discovery of Exhibit H, the
cautionary statement of Captain Adboukarim Jah, the fifth accused person. On
whether the evidence of Captain Seckan is reliable and a source of independent
corroboration, my lord (PW8) Captain Seckan’s entire evidence is highly
suspicious. The entire evidence has a purpose to serve as well. My lord PW8 was
arrested, infact the first to be arrested. He was detained, a cautionary and
voluntary statement obtained from him with a view of charging him. He also
stated that he took charity for the success of the alleged coup, in a nutshell my
lord, I submit that Captain Seckan is a tainted witness and unreliable,”
Camara remarked.
He stated that in the case of ANSELEM AKALONU VS THE STATE (2005) VOL 4
LRCNCC 123, the court of Appeal in Port Harcourt defined a tainted witness thus “
a tainted witness is one who is an accomplice or who by the evidence he gives
has his own interest or purpose to serve and as a result has a tendency to
cover up the true facts of the case.”
Lamin K. Mboge’s Address
Lamin K. Mboge, the counsel for 2nd Lieutenant Pharing Sanyang (4th accused)
and Corporal Samba Bah (8th accused) has urged the Honourable Court Martial
to hold that the prosecution has not prove it’s case against his clients and
that the court should acquit and discharge them accordingly.
In his fifteen page address to the Court Martial, lawyer Mboge said it is
true that Lieutenant Pharing Sanyang and Corporal Samba know about the foiled
coup. But they have discharged the legal burden by;
(a) The 4th accused reporting to his commanding officer, Serigne
Modou Njie by calling him on phone.
(b) The 8th accused telling the 4th accused to report to his superior
and he is not part of it which has been done.
Mboge said Lieutenant Pharing Sanyang is charged with the following;
Count one: Counselling or procuring persons to commit mutiny contrary to
Section 35(1)(c ) of The Gambia Armed Forces Act, cap 19, volume 111 laws of The
Gambia 1990.
Count two: Causing or conspiring with others to cause mutiny contrary to
section 47 (b), laws of The Gambia 1990.
Count three: Mutiny contrary to section 46 of The Gambia Armed Forces Act,
cap 19, volume 111 laws of The Gambia 1990.
Count five: Treason contrary to section 35(1)(a) of the criminal code, cap
10, volume 111, laws of the Gambia 1990.
Count six: Conspiracy to commit treason contrary to section 35(1)(g) of the
criminal code, cap 10, volume 111, laws of The Gambia 1990.
The learned lawyer stated that the eight accused, Corporal Samba Bah is
charged for the following;
Count four: Failure to report mutiny contrary to section 47(e) of The Gambia
Armed Forces Act, cap 19, volume 111, laws of The Gambia 1990.
Count seven: Concealment of treason contrary to section 36(a) of the
criminal code, cap 10, volume 111, laws of The Gambia 1990.
Count eight: Concealment of treason contrary to section 36(b) of the
criminal code, cap 10, volume 111, laws of The Gambia 1990.
Analyzing the prosecution’s case, Mboge said the 4th and 8th accused persons
acknowledged in their statements and in their defence that they heard of the
foiled coup, but the 4th accused said in his defence that he reported to his
commanding officer, Serigne Modou Njie, page 2 of his cautionary statement
which discharges him of the legal burden imposed on him. He further stated
that the 8th accused on the other hand told the 4th accused to report the matter
and he is not interested in it. According to Mboge, the second prosecution
witness, Major Ebrima Bah has not said anything about the 4th and 8th accused
persons, and therefore he did not see the need to address on his evidence.
He also told the court that the 8th prosecution witness, Captain Seckan and
the following prosecution witnesses 3rd, 4th, 6th and 7th did not say
anything about his clients. Mboge said, “In the cautionary statement of the 4th
accused, he stated that he was threatened that he would be killed and his family.
“The 9th prosecution witness, Lamin Cham, obtained the statement of the 4th
accused and he was challenged under cross examination. He denied any use of
force, torture and intimidation before obtaining the 4th accused person’s
cautionary statement, but he could not say whether the 4th accused was tortured
before his statement was taken.” Mboge said.
However, my client has not taken any step to perform the duty assigned to
him by threat, ie, to disconnect a fuse at Gamtel, Telegraph road, Banjul which
shows that he has not consented to the coup. He further stated that with
that fear, he went to Captain Serigne Modou Njie to report the matter but was
not in his office and that was the time he informed the eight accused, Corporal
Samba Bah, about it. The eight accused advised him to desist from it, ie,
involvement which shows that he has not consented to it as well. Again when the
4th accused was informed by Nfamara Jammeh, he told him to call and inform
Serigne Modou Njie, which he did. This clearly shows that the 4th accused has
not consented to the order from the Ex C.D.S and he has taken steps to inform
his commanding officer on telephone. The said Nfamara Jammeh was not called
as a witness. Therefore the statement and evidence of the 4th accused
remained unchallenged and uncontradicted and should be believed by this court. The
4th accused said when the commanding officer came, he briefed him and deployed
him at the airport to secure it.”
He said, “The statement of the 4th accused is sufficient to discharge him of
the legal burden imposed on him because;
(1) There is no evidence of conspiracy against him. He has not agreed
with anyone to commit treason.
(2) He has not counseled or procured anyone to commit mutiny in his
statement and the whole proceedings there is no evidence to that effect.
(3) He did not cause or conspire with anyone to commit mutiny.
(4) He did not commit any mutiny because he obeyed a lawful command
from the commanding officer to go and secure the airport for the president.
(5) He has not committed any treason contrary to the facts contained
in the charge sheet.”
He submitted that in order to do justice to the 4th accused, he should be
discharged and acquitted of all the counts against him because the prosecution
has failed to prove it’s case against him.
Mboge said, “Furthermore, the 8th accused said ‘when the 4th accused
informed him, he advised him not to be part of it.’ He further advised him to
report the matter to the commanding officer Serigne Modou Njie. My lord, this is
sufficient evidence to show that he is not guilty to section 47(e) of The
Gambia Armed Forces Act. On the 2nd charge of concealment of treason contrary to
section 36(a), there is also no evidence that the 8th accused has conspired
with Captain Abdoukarim Jah, Captain Pierre John Mendy, Lt Momodou Alieu Bah,
Babou Janha and Private Alhagie Nying, between January and March 2006 in
Banjul. There is no nexus in the prosecution’s case linking the accused with the
charges. The only person who talked to the 8th accused about the coup is the
4th accused and he advised him to desist from it. This shows that the 8th
accused has no mens rea and no actus reus to be guilty of the offences charged.”
Editor’s Comment:
One of our reporter’s went to the Department of state for Justice Yesterday
and was told that the Acting Director of Public Prosecution, Emmanuel
Fagbenle went to a workshop. We will try and get the prosecution’s address from him
and published it in our next edition.
African Journalists Honour Slained Norbert Zongo
By Madi M.K. Ceesay
One hundred and fifty journalists from the continent of Africa met in the
capital city of Ouagadougou Burkina Faso on 11 April 2007 in the second
International Festival of Freedom of Expression (FILEP) organized by the Bukinabe
union of journalists in collaboration with the civil society organizations and
their National Assembly. The theme for this year’s festival is Strengthening
democracy through safeguarding freedom of expression and the press.
This is the second time since the idea was conceived two years after the
killing of Norbert Zongo, a well known journalist who lived and worked in
Burkina Faso until he was killed by the oppressors of freedom of expression on 13
December 1998.
In his opening speech Cheriff Sy, chairman of the Steering committee of
FILEP, the organizers of the festival, told the participants that freedom of
expression cannot be suppressed if we want democracy to flourish. He called on
the government of Burkina Faso to do all within their powers to bring the
killers of Zongo to book. He lamented that it is nine years today since Zongo was
murdered, depriving his widow and children of him.
Among other speakers at the opening was the President of the West African
Journalist Association (WAJA), Ibrahim Coulibaly. He underline responsible
journalism. He went further to say that a world without journalist would be a
meaningless world. A special tribute was paid to Norbert Zongo and in his memory
and that of Deyda Hydara of the Gambia a minutes silence was observed.
In delivering a paper on the occasion Pauline Bend the programme officer of
Panos Institute for West Africa told the participants that there has been
much violation of media rights including threats, sentencing of journalists
and even killing journalists in this part of our continent. “Freedom of speech
required guarantee from governments” She called for stronger regulations to
protect journalists if they are to do their job.
Bend whose paper is on strategy for the promotion and protection of
journalists & media organization said press organizations cannot survive if they lack
strong economic resources as well as human resources. She said if there is
to be any head way that aspect has to be addressed. Bend noted that there are
weaknesses in the area of training. A good promotion should go with
training. Responsible journalism is what is needed. She concluded her presentation
by saying that the media should consolidate pluralism, failure of that is what
results to the difficulty of consolidating democracy.
Saidou Arji of the Media Foundation for West Africa said media and human
right organizations are strategic allies. He gave the case of the former
Liberian leader as an example of the alliance between the two, which resulted in the
trial of Charles Taylor. He told the gathering that the struggle against
impunity should be one of collaboration between human right defenders and the
media.
He concluded by saying that one should bear in mind that human rights
defenders, freedom of expression defenders are unavoidable strategic ally. He
called for the cooperation between the two.
Chreff Sy a member of the Burkina journalists union and member of the
steering committee of FILEP, the organizers of the festival said in his
presentation that, journalists are subjected to threats and to the point of killing
them. He gave an example of the case of Norbert Zongo as a case of practical
examples. Zongo was killed for no crime other than informing the public. He was
killed and buried on the 13 December 1998, about a 100 Kms from the capital
Ouagadougou. Sy said killing journalists’ impacts on freedom of expression. He
said most of our colleagues assassinated never saw justice as in most of the
cases the killers are still freely roaming our streets. That is a very clear
indication that there is no freedom of expression in such countries.
Freedom of expression is the spinal cord of all rights. If a state protect
freedom of expression that means all other rights are protected. He recalled
what was said during the opening ceremony that denunciations of right
violations must be put into practices. Sy was speaking on the topic ending impunity.
In his contribution to the debate the President of the Gambia Press Union
and director of Media Agenda said like the Secretary of the African Union said,
we the journalists should not be content with observing press releases any
time one of us is killed or have our rights violated. We should as
international body of journalists resolve to security problems to stop the mess by
taking our cases before international bodies.
MAGISTRATE MARTINS ISSUES ULTIMATUM
By Modou Jonga
Magistrate Assan Martins of the Brikama Magistrates Court on Tuesday 17th
told the prosecution in the trial of Lamin R. Darboe (UDP Kombo East candidate)
and four other supporters of UDP, to be resolved to proceed on 2 May, 2007
or risk having the case struck out.
Magistrate Martins made this remark after adjourning the said case to give
the prosecution reasonable time to get them ready to proceed. The accused
person, Lamin R. Darboe, Buba Darboe, Momodou Demba and Maimuna Jobarteh have
pleaded not guilty to assault charges preferred against them. The alleged
assault is said to have been committed at Pirang Village on 15 May, 2006.
In applying for an adjournment, ASP Badjie holding brief for prosecutor 413
Sanyang, stated that the said prosecutor is transferred and he is yet to hand
over his case file. As such ASP Badjie indicated that the case could not
proceed. ASP Badjie further stressed that the said trial had been dragging on
not because of the prosecution but because the court had been unfunctional.
According to the second accused (Lamin R. Darboe) the said trial had dragged on
for seven months.
The defence counsel for the accused person, Lawyer Ousainou Darboe was
absent. The presiding Magistrate also urged the accused persons to make effort in
making sure their counsel is present on the next adjourned date.
All the accused persons except Maimuna Jobarteh (the fifth accused) who is
said to be sick, were present in court.
KMC Gets New Mayor
A press release issued by the Office of The President has announced that “
the Acting Appointment of Mr. Francis Gomez as Acting Mayor of KMC has been
terminated with effect from Monday 16 April 2007.” The release states that it
relied on “the Local Government Act of 2002 and its amended version of 2004.”
It did not indicate the sections of the Act they relied on. No reason was
advanced for the removal.
The statement also revealed that Mr. Alieu Momar Njie, Chief Scout
Commissioner has been appointed as Acting Mayor, KMC with immediate effect. Mr. Alieu
Momar Njie is also a member of the Independent Electoral Commission. That
appointment came in the wake of the removal of former IEC Chairman, Mr. Ndondi
Njie.
Comments:
1. Section 193 of the Constitution states: “Local government administration
in The Gambia shall be based on a system of democratically elected councils
with a high degree of local autonomy.”
Can we say that the acts and conduct of the Executive, characterized by the
removal and appointment of Mayors at will is inconsistent with this provision
of the constitution, which is entrenched? Does the Executive take
decentralization and devolution of power seriously or does it consider local
authorities as a means to exert its influence and authority over the people?
Can Mr.Momar Njie maintain the two positions he now wields and at the same
time remain faithful to the IEC’s principles of impartiality considering that
KMC is the bedrock of the APRC in the Kanifing Municipality?
IN DUDU KASSA JAATA AND CO CASE
INSPECTOR SAMBA SOWE CROSS EXAMINED
By Fabakary B. Ceesay
Defense counsel Lamin S Camara, has on Monday the 16th April cross examined
the station officer of Bakau Police Station in the trial of Dudu Kassa Jaata
and seven others.
Inspector Sowe said that he took over from ASP Sawaneh as the S.O of Bakau
Station on the 6th August 2006. He said that Sawaneh has handed over to him
somethings in connection to the case, the iron bar (exhibit A). He said that
the iron bar was included in the list of items handed over to him hand to hand.
He said that he does not have the iron bar at that moment but that he can
produce it when ever required by the court. He said that he cannot remember
whether the iron bar was labeled when he was receiving it. He noted that the
iron bar was kept in the station where they normally keep exhibits. He denied
the possibility that the iron bar can be mixed with other exhibits. He indicated
that was the only iron bar which was handed over to him. He said ASP Sawaneh
told him that the iron bar was found with one accused person, “Ndure” but
that he cannot remember the full name. He said that he had met Cherno Ndure
after the 6th August 2006. He said that he doesn’t know when Cherno was
arrested and the reason for his arrest.
He said that it was when Cherno was brought to the station that he knew the
Cherno whom the iron bar was recovered from. He added that he does not know
whether Cherno Ndure is the only Cherno in Bakau, but that he came to know him
when he was brought to the station. The state prosecution 870 Corporal Amat
Touray told the court that they are closing their case. Defense Counsel
Camara informed the court that they wanted to submit” a no case to answer”
submission.
Dudu Kassa Jaata, Lamin Jawara, Cherno Ndure, Mamburama Jatta, Mariama
Fatty, Iastou Jawara, Omar Jatta are standing trial for allegedly arming
themselves in public and obstructing police officers while executing their duties.
They all pleaded not guilty. So far the state provides nine witnesses in
court.
UDP Candidate & 9 Others In Court
Charge Purported To Be Unconstitutional
By Yaya Dampha
Mr. Saiba Sanyang the defeated UDP candidate together with Jonfolo Jabbi,
Tupa Manneh, Burama Janneh, Muhammed Manneh, Boyo Manneh, Kakai Sanyang, Haddy
Sanyang, Elleyala Manneh and Nemang Manneh are facing three charges, namely
condusive conduct, unlawful assembly and common assault.
The defence counsel Babadinding Jobarteh said the charge of unlawful
assembly contrary to section 69 of the Criminal Code is an unconstitutional charge,
since it does not conform with Sections 17 and 25 of the Constitution. He
said the right to assemble is a fundamental right, noting that the court should
further consider Section 4 of the Constitution, which says the constitution
is the supreme law. He submitted that the right of every individual is
entrenched in the constitution and shall be protected. He asserted that counts 1 and
2 arose from the assembly, which the prosecution calls unlawful when it is
the right of the accused persons. Counsel Jobarteh urged the court to refer
the matter to the Supreme Court.
He submitted that any law found to be inconsistent with the constitution is
void. The prosecution applied for adjournment to prepare to respond to the
submission of the defence.
Magistrate Baldeh adjourned the case till 8 – 9 May, 2007 for the court to
advise itself.
GFA League: Hawks Seek Top Spot Today
By Modou Nyang
Hawks FC will today seek to level points with Wallidan at the top of the
league table when they play Gambia Ports Authority at the Serrekunda West
playing grounds.
Hawks currently sits second on the league table with twelve points, three
less than leaders Wallidan. The 2007 CAF Confederation Cup drop-outs will take
on Ports in a rescheduled match as the two were engaged in continental
competitions, and if current form is anything to go by, Hawks will level Wallidan
on fifteen points and have another chance to go on top outright with another
match still pending.
The 2006 FA Cup winners have currently played six matches winning three and
drawing three. They are yet to lose a match.
Wallidan and Armed Forces Share Points
By Musa Barrow
League leaders Wallidan were held to a one all draw by Armed forces on
Sunday at the Serrekunda West grounds.
The game which was watched by a good number of spectators started in
explosive style as each side went for an early upset. Wallidan was the better in the
first half as they forced their opponents to play in their own half. And
assisted by the wind, Wallidan put a siege on the Armed Forces penalty area and
the blue boys could have put the game beyond repairs had they utilised their
numerous chances. Just as every thought the first half would end in a
stalemate Wallidan’s prolific goal poacher Pa Modou Ngum broke the death lock in the
final minute of the half. Armed Forces on the defensive end missed a couple
of chances relying on the counter offensive tactic.
What goes around comes around and in the second period Wallidan had a change
of fortunes as they in turn struggled against the wind. Armed forces could
not hesitate as they took their turn in putting pressure on their opponents in
search of a leveler. Wallidan too resorted to the defensive option allowing
the soldiers to force an equalizer.
Their efforts paid off in the 88th minute when Buba Darboe leveled terms
from close range to earn the Walo champions a vital point. Darboe’s gaol raised
the alarm bell for Wallidan and they put all men behind the ball to protect
their slim advantage at the top of the league table.
At the Banjul grounds Gamtel and Gambia ports Authority FC played a one all
draw and Hawks defeated Sait Matty by 3 goals to 2 at Serrekunda East.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
|