GAMBIA-L Archives

The Gambia and Related Issues Mailing List

GAMBIA-L@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:36:02 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (86 lines)
Hi!
    I wonder how Mr. Wowo can justify his "99 per cent chances of winning
the appeal based on the law". Maybe he meant he had 99% chance of losing and
he was misquoted. Doesn't the law say that an arrested individual must be
brought before a court of law as promptly as possible and in any case latest
72 hours after the arrest? It took the state over two weeks. Even 14 days
according to my calculator is 336 hours and it took them more than 14 days
to charge Dumo. What is so ambiguous about the law or better still, which
law is Mr. Wowo talking about?
    The law also says that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest and
detention and that those arrested shall be arrested in accordance with the
procedures of the law. Unless I am dreaming can Mr. Wowo please show us
where in the laws of The Gambia it is stated that someone can be arrested
and kept for over 300 hours without being charged, kept for over 3 weeks
without access to a lawyer when the Constitution grants the arrested
individual the right to "consult a legal practitioner"? C'mon, his lawyers
are still trying to locate him. How can they effectively prepare his defence
when they can't even find him?
    On what grounds should the suit against the state be dropped when
section 19, subsection 6 of the Constitution clearly states that "any person
who is unlawfully arrested or detained by any other person shall be entitled
to compensation from that other person or from any other person or authority
on whose behalf that other person was acting"? Doesn't over 300 hours of
detention without charge instead of 72 and refusal to let him have access to
his lawyer and family constitute unlawful detention? Even when a state of
emergency is declared, section 36 (b) of the Consitution provides that "the
spouse, parent, child or any other available next-of-kin of the person
detained shall be informed by the authority effecting the detention and
shall be permitted access to the person concerned at the earliest
practicable opportunity, and in any case not later than twenty-four hours
after the commencement of the detention". The law is very clear that even
those arrested under a state of emergency shall have certain inalienable
rights. Yet these rights are violated in a non-emergency situation. C'mon,
Mr. Wowo, please save the Gambian taxpayer some money by not fighting what
is so obvious. Thanks.

Buharry.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bokaloho <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 1:58 PM
Subject: State challenges 'unconstitutionality' of Dumo's detention


> >From today's Observer:
> "The state has filed an appeal (överklagande) in the Court of Appeal,
> contesting the decision passed by High Court Judge, Justice Mam Yassin
Sey,
> that the continued detention of Modou Dumo Sarho, was unconstitutional."
> .... "Dissatisfied with Justice Sey's ruling, the indefatigable principal
> state counsel, Joseph Wowo, filed an appeal on behalf of the state the
same
> day, contesting the ruling." "In an appeal dated July 18th, 2000, Wowo
> argued that Justice Sey, 'erred in law in holding that the arrest and
> detention of modou Dumo Sarho is unconstitutional and unlawful..." "Mr
Wowo
> asked the Appeal Court to issue a declaration setting aside Justice Sey's
> decision" and " .... issue another declaration that the acts of the state
> were constitutional and lawful" and "dismiss the suit brought against the
> state. Asked whether he had chances of winning his appeal, Mr Wowo told
> Daily Observer, 'The State has 99 per cent chances of winning the appeal
> based on the law.' The Appeal Court is yet to fix a date for the appeal
> hearing."
> They are really showing their true faces, aren't they!?
> By the way, the lawyers have not yet been able to locate Dumo. They're
> working on it. I should guess that the legality even of that magistrate
> ruling in Kanifing last Friday could be questioned in the light of the
> absence of counselling for the accused.
> Annika
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
> Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2