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]
����������������������������������������������������������