FOROYAA – BURNING ISSUES

Issue Number 95/2003, 11-14 December, 2003

EDITORIAL

No State Instruction For Seizure Of CFA and Properties Says SoS Interior

Gambians are very dissatisfied with the rise in the cost of living. However
no person should take the law into his/her own hands. If government is
serious about price controls by might it would draft price bills and get it
passed into law. It can then get the law enforcement agencies to ensure
their implementation. However, to give the impression that security forces
could get up and seize money and properties without any provision of law can
only encourage impunity and alienation of such forces. This is neither good
for their reputation nor for the maintenance of peace and security in a
nation.

This is why Halifa Sallah asked the following questions:

"Mr. Speaker, would the Secretary of State for the Interior indicate to this
august Assembly whether there has been any instruction for any members of
the Security Forces to seize CFA Francs from business persons as well as
properties at established prices; if so what is being done with the money
seized and what law is being relied on to make the seizures of property and
arrests?"

The Secretary of State for Interior gave the following answers:

"Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the Hon. Member of the National
Assembly for Serrekunda Central that there were no instructions to seize CFA
Francs or force anyone to sell their properties. The Police received
intelligence reports that some business enterprises were hoarding foreign
currencies in their shops and as a consequence mounted an investigation to
establish the veracity or otherwise of the said allegation, but when it was
confirmed that the said foreign currencies were proceeds from their
respective daily sales, the businesses concerned were advised to lodge their
foreign currencies with the commercial banks."

Conclusion

Anybody who is aggrieved should contact Foroyaa so that the Secretary of
State could be properly informed. What we need are strong consumer
associations, which will negotiate with the businesspersons to establish
reasonable prices. Such an association can even establish consumer
cooperatives to contribute to purchase commodities for sale at reasonable
prices. Democratic means should be used to protect consumer’s not brute
force.

Trial Of Baba Jobe & Others

GPA MD Adama Deen Testifies

After the lawyers had ironed out their differences and got over the
preliminaries, the trial proper of Majority Leader Baba Jobe, the Youth
Development Enterprise (YDE) and its Managing Director, Baba Kanteh resumed
in earnest on Tuesday with the testimony of the first witness, Adama Deen,
the Managing Director of Gambia Ports Authority. In his testimony, he told
the court that Baba Jobe took out goods on behalf of YDE from the Banjul
Harbour on 22 occasions but only made two payments. The practice, he said,
is for the GPA to allow their ‘credit customers’, which includes Baba Jobe,
to take out their goods and pay later. He acknowledged that he has been
allowing Baba Jobe to take goods without paying the fees for the previous
ones, contrary to their procedure. When asked why he did so he said that he
simply continued a practice that he inherited. He told the court that the
YDE has an outstanding amount of twenty-six, Read on for the details.

The Charges

The charges are as follows:

Count One: Failure to pay port duties to the tune of twenty-seven million
one hundred and sixty three thousand three hundred and ninety-five dalasis
fifty-five bututs (D27,163,395.55), contrary to section 5(b) of the Economic
Crimes (Specified Offences) Decree 1994.

Count Two: Count two deals with evading the payment of port dues contrary to
section 84 of the Ports Act.

Count Three: Baba Jobe and Baba Kanteh have from 2001 to date caused
economic losses of 70 million dalasis in import duties and others.

Count Four: This count alleges that Baba Jobe is in breach of section 5(b)
of the Economic Crimes (Specified Offences) Decree and section 6 of the
Customs Tariffs Act.

Count Five: This count alleges that contrary to section 291 of the Criminal
Code, Baba Jobe had obtained credits of various forms totalling 70 million
dalasis from the Customs Department under false pretence from 2001 to 2003;
that payments were made in cheques.

Count Six: Baba Jobe is accused of conspiracy to commit a felony by causing
financial losses to GPA and the Customs Department contrary to section 368
of the Criminal Code.

Proceedings of 8 December

During these proceedings, the defence counsels, namely, Ousman Sillah and
Mai Fatty for Baba Jobe, Lamin Camara for Baba Kanteh and Edu Gomez for YDE,
all applied for an adjournment, noting that they needed more time to become
au fait with the case. They submitted that they had not been served with the
summary of the evidence, which is their right.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Akimoyae Agim, for his part, submitted
that in the previous proceedings he had served Mai Fatty with a copy of all
the information as counsel for all the accused persons. While acknowledging
that Ousman Sillah, Lamin Camara and Edu Gomez are new to the case, he
submitted that there should be proper transfer to the new counsels. He
further submitted that there is no reason why the prosecution cannot put its
witness in the box to give evidence. He therefore opposed the application
for an adjournment.

In his ruling, the trial judge, Justice Paul, ruled that Mai N.K. Fatty
knows why the accused persons were charged. While overruling the
application, Justice Paul decided to adjourn the case till the following
day, Tuesday 9 December.

Proceedings of 9 December 2003

Representation was the same as in the previous day. However, Lawyer Lamin
Mboge did announce his representation of all the accused persons. At this
stage, the prosecution called its first witness, Mr. Adama Deen, the
Managing Director of Gambia Ports Authority.

Testimony of Adama Deen

Q; Name?

A: Adama Deen.

Q: Address?
A: Kanifing East Estate

Q: Occupation?
A: Managing Director, GPA.

Q: Do you know the accused persons?
A: Yes.

Q: How do you know the first accused?
A: I know him as one of the most influential politicians, majority leader of
the National Assembly and a businessman who ships several vessels of goods
into the port.

Q: What is his relationship with the GPA?
A: He has been a credit customer for the past three years.

Q: How does he become a credit customer?
A: Whenever his goods arrive at the port, he comes to arrange for their
release.

Q: How many times?

A: 22 times, from 2001 to 2003.

Q: How was he able to do that?

A: Since he is a credit customer when his goods come he comes to the GPA and
negotiates for their release.

Q: When goods come to the GPA, what is normally done before they are
released?
A: Certain payments, such as handling charges, stevedoring dues and other
charges need to be paid.

Q: How many times has he paid out of 22?

A: Only twice

Q: Why were you accepting to release his goods just like that without
payments?

A: This is the trend I met after I took over in February 2003.

Q: Usually when was he supposed to pay?

A: He should pay for the previous ones before the next consignment is
released

Q: Why do you continue to do the same with him even when he was not paying?

A: Because he comes to plead.

Q: As a credit customer does he have an account with you?
A: Yes.

Q: Under which name is the account?
A: Y.D.E.

Q: Can you explain how the two payments were effected?

A: He made the first payment with regard to the consignment that came on
board MV…. In which he paid D299,000 and the second time on MV Walnanela
D623,000. On the second one he issued a cheque after wards he paid the
amount in cash and withdraw the cheque.

Q: How many cheques were issued by him?

A: They were two, one for D623,000 and the second was for D2.2 million for
clearing of the balance of the last MV Walnanela and other balances for
those two shipments.

Q: Where were those two cheques directed?

A: Standard Chattered Bank.

Q: Were you able to cash the two cheques?

A: No

Q: After this what did you do?

A: The director of finance wrote to him on the 27th of September that they
should do things rightly.

Q: What role did the second accused play?

A: As managing director of YDE, he wrote a subsequent letter on the 1st
October 2003 to our letter of 27th September 2003.

Q: Do you have a copy of your letter of 27th September?

A: Yes.

Q: To whom was it addressed?
A: YDE.

Shown a copy of the letter Mr. Deen confirmed it. It was tendered. The
defence objected on the grounds that even though the document is admissible
it cannot be tendered through Mr. Deen since he was not the right witness to
do so. Secondly, they were not informed in the summaries of the evidence of
Deen, that he is to tender any such document. They relied on section 24
subsection (3) and 175 of the CPC subsection (2) and (3).

The trial judge overruled the objection. It was marked exhibit A.

Secondly he was shown the reply written by the MD of YDE titled settlement
of arrears and asked the sum involved?

A: It is D26,193,241.30; that Mr. Kanteh had further asked for discount but
it was not granted.

Q: Was the first accused fulfilling his promises to pay?

A: No

Q: Are there any other correspondence between GPA and YDE on the matter?

A; Yes there have been series of correspondence from the GPA to YDE and from
YDE to GPA asking YDE to pay for the arrears.

Q: Do you have their copies?

A: Yes.

Shown a copy of a letter dated 19th September 2003, he confirmed it. It was
admitted and marked exhibit C. he was again shown a letter of the GPA’s
demand for payment. It was confirmed and tendered but not objected to. It
was marked exhibit D. another letter of demand dated 5th August 2003 was
marked exhibit E.

Q: Do you know Mr. A.R Bah?
A: Yes he is my deputy.

Q: Were you in office on the 8th October 2003?

A: No.

Shown a copy of a letter from the YDE objecting to the payment it was
confirmed. It was tendered but not objected to and marked exhibit F.

Q: Do you know why that Standard Bank cheque was later paid in cash and
withdrawn?

A: Yes. One of them, Mr. Baldeh told the director of finance that there was
no money in the account.

At this stage again a correspondence from YDE to GPA pleading a discount was
shown to the witness and he confirmed t. it was tendered with no objection
and marked exhibit G. he was then shown a Standard Bank cheque which was
equally marked exhibit H.

Q: Do you also have a copy of the withdrawal cheque?

A: Yes.

Q: How were you able to have it?

A: The finance director photocopied it before its withdrawal.

Q: Who signed it?

A: the first accused.

He was further again shown a photocopy of a bank cheque bearing only a
signature and dated 14th September as the withdrawn cheque. Mr. Deen
confirmed it and it was tendered without objection and marked exhibit I.

Q: Can you tell the court why the first accused used a blank cheque?
A: Normally clients who are credit customers are allowed to do so on
postdated cheques. Then on the due date their total arrears with the GPA is
filed in by the director of finance before the cashing.

At 13:10 hours the DPP had applied for the case to be stood down for 30
minutes to allow him appear before Justice Belgore on matter connected to
the 3 years treason trial. It was granted with no objection from the
defence. Sitting resumed at 14:13 hours.

Q: Can you tell the court why payments were not effected on the rest of the
20 vessels except those two?

A: Despite several demanding letters from us indicating the astronomical
nature of the indebtedness of YDE to GPA to no avail, then we wrote a letter
to the secretary general’s office of the president. He advised us to stop
the credit and introduce cash and carry. Mr. Deen said following this, when
Mr. Jobe’s shipment arrived, he tried and was asked for payment before
release. That the credit facility was no more. He made a payment of cash
amount D299,000 in effect of the balance of those two shipments.

Q: After this did you continue to effect any credit to him?

A: Yes as his vessels continued to come even in my absence.

Q: After these payments did he effect any payments in the last three years?
A: No.

Q: How do you come to know the second accused?

A: The first accused introduced him to us on the 6th October.

Q: After the 6th of October 2003, did you make any transactions with the
first accused?
A: Yes, this was when MV Cicab came.

Q: After that, were there any other transactions?
A: No that was the last one.

Q: Have you got copies of the invoices that you sent to the first accused of
what he owes to the GPA?

A: Yes, the copy of the two booklets containing invoices and statements of
account owed by the YDE to the GPA were shown to the witness, he confirmed
them and they were tendered for identification purposes. There was no
objection. The DPP then rose to change his mind and applied for the booklets
to be admitted for evidence. Mr. Sillah then objected that the M.D is not
the witness who should tender those summaries of evidence. Mr. Sillah
indicated that the summaries in question do not in any way relate to his own
summaries. He said the sections of defence No 16 earlier cited by the DPP
cannot override section 4 of the 1997 constitution. He further cited section
24 subsection (3) of the 1997 constitution and added that it was also in the
1970 constitution legislated by parliament in 1982 developed section 175
CPC. He asserted that all are dealing with fair trial. He further read the
third paragraph of procedures to criminal trial at page 330. Mr. Sillah
further cited the case of Mai Kankan in the All Ghana Law report 1963.

Mr. Mai Fatty for his part said he associated himself in toto with Mr.
Sillah. He further argued that his grounds of objection are two. (1) The M.D
is not the right person to tender those documents. He indicated that the CPA
is a statutory body created by the Act that created the various positions
from MD, finance director etc. he then asserted that the MD cannot therefore
act for all other offices. Secondly he cited the Evidence Act section 94 and
said among the documents tendered through the MD there is clear evidence in
his own evidence that the finance director prepared them.

On the fair trial, Fatty cited a Nigerian case. He asserted that the copies
of the invoices, letters and cheques should have been provided to the
defence even before the hearing starts.

DPP for his part has argued the court to accept the documents as are of
relevance to the court. That the matter is regarding admissibility, tat the
defence have not shown any law on statutory law; that the MD is the
superintendent of the activities of the GPA; that as the MD, he is supposed
to know everything about the GPA. He asserted that it is ridiculous for a
man to say God does not know certain things in the world. General laughter
kan,kan,kang. The DPOP further submitted that the case of Mai Kankan earlier
cited, does not apply to the present case; tat the reason are that the
documents tendered in that case are not the same and the Ghanaian Criminal
Act is different with our own section 175 of the CPC.

Ruling

Justice Paul overruled the objection on the grounds that the MD is the chief
executive. That as chief executive, he is entitled to do and know everything
about GPA. The matter is adjourned to 10th December, 2003.

Issue Number 96/2003, 15-17 December, 2003

EDITORIAL

Can An Accused Person Be Denied Bail?

Many readers have approached FOROYAA to enquire whether an accused person
can be denied bail for delaying a case.

Our response is simple. A person holding judicial office has full control in
handling a case. No person can delay a case without the complicity of the
judge or the magistrate.

What is expected of a person holding judicial office is to abide by the
dictates of the constitution. The constitution states in section 24:

"Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be given adequate
time and facilities for the preparation of his or her defence" and "shall be
permitted to defend himself or herself before the court in person or, at his
or her own expense, by a legal representative."

In fact a person who is charged with an offence that is punishable by death
or imprisonment for life is entitled to legal aid and at the expense of the
state. In short, where the liberty of the accused is at stake a competent
judge or magistrate must even bend over backwards to ensure that the accused
person is defended by the legal representative of his or her choice, so that
justice is seen to be done. A court should proceed to hear a case without
legal representation only if all reasonable means are exhausted to enable
the accused person to be represented by a legal counsel of his or her
choice.

Competent judges enlarge the opportunity for the accused to provide a proper
defence against the allegations made against him/her. This enables justice
to be done and seen to be done.


Halifa’s Letter to the Chief Justice

On The conduct Of Judicial Officers

Honourable Chief Justice, I am compelled by the dictates of conscience and
public duty to address these concerns to you in particular and member of the
bar and bench in general.

The unpleasant exchanges between legal practitioners in our courts are a
subject of mass coverage in our media. The people in the Gambia and the
international community at large are standing in judgment. In short, while
it is the duty of the judiciary to do justice, it is the duty of the public
to pass judgment on whether justice is seen to be done.

Honourable Chief Justice, it is my humble view that Justice is one of the
fundamental pillars of a stable society. Once the pillar of justice crumbles
the whole edifice of social order must crumble.

How the judiciary can contribute to the consolidation of peace, security,
stability and justice is of primary concern.

Honourable Chief Justice, the members of the bench are the administrators of
the law. They are responsible for the proper dispensation of justice. This
is precisely the reason why the constitution has stated categorically what
type of conduct is expected from the officials of the judiciary.

Section 120, subsection (3) of the constitution states: "in the exercise of
their judicial functions, the courts, the judges and other holders of
judicial office shall be independent and shall be subject only to this
constitution and the law and, save as provided in this chapter, shall not be
subject to the control or direction of any other person or authority".
Holders of judicial office should therefore be totally free from any fear or
ill will. They should not be prejudicial in their conduct.

Section 222 of the constitution subsection (8) adds: "A public officer who
exercises judicial functions shall "(a) maintain order and decorum in
judicial proceedings before him or her; (b) be patient, dignified and
courteous to all litigants, witnesses, legal practitioners and others in the
exercise of such functions, and shall require similar conduct from his or
her staff and others subject to his or her control".

Honourable Chief Justice, hostilities being displayed during some of the
proceedings do not accord with the dictates of Section 222 of the
Constitution.

Section 121 of the Constitution states: "The Chief Justice shall be the head
of the judiciary and subject to the provisions of the constitution shall be
responsible for the administration and supervision of the courts".

The mantle falls on you to ensure that "order and decorum characterise
judicial proceedings and that judges are patient, dignified and courteous to
all litigants, witnesses, legal practitioners and all others in the exercise
of his or her judicial functions".

In my view the duty of a judge is to do justice without fear or favour,
affection or ill will. A judge should seek to guide an accused person to get
proper legal counsel and should provide adequate time for him or her to
prepare a defence.

A judge should proceed with a case without counsel for an accused person
only when it is reasonable and justifiable to do so in order to avert the
derailing of justice.

It is therefore hoped that you will have a word with all those who hold
judicial office so that they carry out their duties in accordance with the
code of conduct established by the constitution in order to protect the
independence, dignity, integrity and effectiveness of the judiciary. To whom
much authority is entrusted much patience, compassion, courtesy, good faith
and fair play is expected.

By a copy of this letter, I wish to call on all human rights organisations,
the Attorney General, the African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights
Studies and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights to monitor
the cases in our courts so that we can fairly appraise whether the holders
of judicial office are performing their duties without fear or favour,
affection or ill will, in accordance with the dictates of the constitution
and the best practice of the legal profession. Gambia and the Gambian people
deserve no less.

While anticipating your maximum consideration of my concern

I remain,

Yours in the Service of the Nation,

Halifa Sallah

Minority Leader and National Assembly Member for Serrekunda Central.


Baba Jobe’s Trial

Part 2

The trial of Baba Jobe, the YDE and its Managing Director, Baba Kanteh
gained momentum with the testimony of the first of prosecution witness, Mr.
Adama Deen, Managing Director GPA on Tuesday 9th December. He testified that
shipments of goods were released to Baba Jobe on behalf of the YDE, but only
two shipments were paid for. The witness spent the whole day in the witness
box. The case was then adjourned till the next day 10th December for
continuation of examination in chief. We now present the proceedings of 10th
December.

Proceedings of 10th December, 2003, Testimony of Adama Deen Continuation

Q: Did you tell the court that the first accused continued to make more
transactions with the GPA even after 27st September 2003?

A: Yes

Q: What is the total outstanding between GPA and the first accused?

A: As at date the total outstanding between the GPA and the first accused is
D27.2 million. End of Examination

Cross Examination Of Adama Deen By Ousman Sillah

Q: Mr. Deen, when did you join the GPA?

A: 2nd February 2002.

Q: Where were you before joining the GPA?

A: GPTC as MD.

Q: From 2nd /2/2002 were you the MD of GPA to date.

A: No. except from the 30th October to 1st November 2003.

Q: What happened?

A: I was terminated.

Q: Why?

A: I do not know.

Q: Were there any reasons given?

A: No.

Q:Were you given a letter?
A: Yes.

Q: Then what happened on the 1st November 2003?

A: I was reinstated.

Q: Do you know why?

A: No.

Q: Was it by letter?

A: Yes.

Q:Do you know that GPA was established by a statute?
A: Yes.

Q: Do you know the statute?

A: Yes, the GPA Act.

Q: By that Act what is your role as MD?

A: To operate and manage the affairs of the GPA on a daily basis.

Q: How many departments are within the GPA?

A: You have the directorate, administration, finance, harbour, ferries etc,
etc.

Q: Do you have a way book in all departments?

A: No, normally letters are distributed by administration and finance.

Q: So it means that all the various invoices you send out would be indicated
in those books and are signed for?
A: Yes.

Q: Apart from administration and finance, is there any other department that
deals with out going letters?
A: Yes, the credit control office.

Q: Is it correct that all heads of department can write letters and sign on
your behalf?
A: Yes.

Q:Do they send you a copy?
A: Yes.

Q: Would you be able to make those way books available, can you send any of
your surbodinates to bring them as we continue?
A: The witness was silent. The DPP objected and said they will be able to do
that,. Since the defence have all rights to apply for any document relating
to the case they are free to check and list down all documents they may need
with regard to the witness. The trial judge advised the defence to do so. It
was agreed on.

At this stage, Mr. Deen was shown a copy of a letter written to the
secretary general by the GPA and asked who wrote it?

A: Mr. Deen said Tambedou.

Q: Who is he?

A: He is the credit controller.

Q: Who did you say is the director of finance?
A: Mr. Samba.

Q: Are there any other personnel that are usually involved in invoicing?

A: Yes. Mrs. Sallah and Ya-Fatou Touray.

Q: Have you told the court that your lawyer had written to the first
accused?
A: Yes.

Q:Who is your lawyer?
A: Alh. Abdoulie Drammeh.

Q: Was there any reply?
A: Yes. Mr. Kanteh replied to indicated a D100,000 module of payment monthly
and a discount and we said No.

Q:Do you have a copy?
A: Witness was silent.

Q: If you see the copy of the letter would you identify it?
A: Yes.

As counsel for the defence Ousman Sillah pointed out the letter to the
witness, the DPP sprang to say that by the Evidence Act any document to be
referred to or tendered through the witness has to form part of the
evidence. He then objected that the letter be shown to the witness. He
further added that since the letter is meant to contradict the evidence it
was necessary to followed rule of law.

For his part, Mr. Sillah submitted to the court that the objection of the
DPP is no objection since he has not relied on any law. That it is the DPP
himself that raised the question of the lawyer ‘s letter during his
examination of the witness in his evidence in chief. Mr. Sillah the cited
section 201 of the Evidence Act but before even he completed reading, the
DPP agreed. Mr. Sillah asked the court to dismiss the objection which
Justice Paul did.

Ousman Sillah then proceeded to show the witness. Mr. Deen confirmed that it
is the letter written on behalf of the GPA to the first accused Baba Jobe,
copied to the secretary general, office of the president, department of
state for communication, finance, interior, the managing director GPA. Mr.
Sillah then applied to tender the letter through the witness, it did not
meet any objection. It was admitted and marked exhibit L. Mr. Deen was asked
to read the letter. The content advised the first accused to settle its dues
of D26,193,241.30 to the GPA within 7 days without which they would
institute civil proceedings against them in the high court.
Q: Did he comply with the 7 days ultimatum?

A: No.

Q: Why did you not react by advising your lawyer to go ahead with the court
action?
A: Mr. Deen said this was due to the fact that we gave Mr. Jobe concession
to come forward at least to make some payments.

Q: Mr. Sillah again gave a copy of a letter written by Mr. A.K. Bah signed
for the M.D. Q: Who is this Mr. Bah?

A: My deputy, but when he wrote this letter I was not in town.

Q: But you know about the letter?
A: Yes. Like I said, this was the time we were trying to have concession, in
terms of payments. The letter is dated 28th October 2003 it was tendered. It
was admitted and marked Exhibit M.

Q: Do you know that YDE is a corporate body with limited liability?
A: Yes.

Q: And you also know that it is unlawful to address the issues of a company
with limited liability to an individual as an individual matter?
A: Yes. But like I said all along I did not know that YDE was a company with
limited liability. (There was general laughter and murmuring. Judge: Silence
the court in progress). Mr. Sillah continued further to ask for Exhibits G,
etc from the court clerk that were written by the YDE addressed to the MD.
The witness was asked if the letter head bears limited liability?

A: Mr. Deen answered in the affirmative.

Q:Mr.Deen, do you have any qualifications?
A: Yes.

Q:What are they?
A: I am an economist and I also have masters in transportation.

Q: Mr. Sillah finally asked the witness Mr. Deen, Do you have any training
or some form of training in the field of law as an economist?
A: The witness remained silent for a while. Mr. Sillah repeated the
question. Then Mr. Deen said no. There was general laughter and murmuring
for some time with the judge calling for silence.

At this stage the matter was adjourned till 18th December 2003 with the
court advising the defence to list down all documents they may need in
connection to the witness. He advised the prosecution to provide them with
all documents.


JUWARA’S DETENTION CREATES ROW

NDAM Youthwing Leader Arrested

The continued detention of the Leader of the National Democratic Action
Movement (NDAM) Lamin Waa Juwara, created a row at the Banjul High Court on
Friday between officers of the Police Intervention Unit and NDAM
Sympathizers. The unprecedented development led to the arrest and sudden
detention of NDAM’s Youth Wing Leader, Pa Manneh.

When the case was announced on Friday, the Director of Public Prosecutions,
Akimoyae Agim who appeared for the State, told the court that the Counsel
for the accused, Borry Touray had served him with a motion; that the motion
is dated 11th December 2003; and that he is going to file an affidavit in
opposition to the motion. He said he wants to correct certain facts. He told
the court that the state witnesses were present in court, but the defence
are those dragging the matter. He urged the court to adjourn the matter till
19th December 2003.

Borry Touray, Counsel for the accused told the court that he is applying to
assume his representation for Juwara following his temporary withdrawal,
which was granted by his Lordship, Justice Paul.

"I will also wish to apply for a copy of the warrant which, was issued
yesterday to the accused person. I wish to state that let Friday’s
adjournment be for the motion. I would further apply for a typed record of
yesterday’s proceedings. I was discussing with my client the issue of
continuing to represent him. We have had a firm and concrete agreement on
that and I have advised myself accordingly to proceed with the case", he
remarked.

The trial Judge, Justice Paul ruled that the Friday’s sitting would be to
hear the motion filed by Borry Touray. He announced that the records of
proceedings and the warrant issued for Juwara’s detention will be prepared
and given to Borry Touray.

Few minutes after the court rose, one of the Three Prison Officers who
accompanied Juwara to the Court, urged the latter to follow them to Mile 2
Central Prisons. "You mean we are going back to Mile 2 Central Prisons?

Some of his sympathizers insisted he would not return to Mile 2 Prisons.
Juwara urged them to be patient, but his angry sympathizers would not listen
to him. Tension began to mount up, but Neneh Cham, a Legal Practitioner,
Omar Jallow alias OJ and others urged them to exercise restrain. Borry
Touray, Counsel for Juwara spoke to them and later urged Juwara to wait for
him. Touray and the Director of Public Prosecution Akimoyae Agim later met
in the chamber of Justice Paul. Touray then tried to solicit Juwara’s
release, but Justice Paul was said to be adamant on the issue. According to
sources, he told Touray that he should have applied for bail in an open
court. After about 45 minutes of calm, Touray who was waiting for the judge
to issue him with the warrant that was issued to his client the following
day, came out and urged the NDAM Supporters to allow Juwara to go back to
Mile 2 Prisons. The NDAM Supporters complied and were only waiting to see
Juwara off. A Senior Police Officer called Sanneh, later came and said he
was going to arrest the NDAM Youth Wing Leader Pa Manneh. The latter asked
the former why he wanted to arrest him. Lawyer Ousainou Darboe came in to
talk to both Manneh and Sanneh, a Plain Clothes Officer came and shouted,
"why are you wasting time with this man, take him away", he ordered. Four
Officers of the Police Intervention Unit armed with baton grabbed him and
took him to a standby vehicle. The members of the Police Intervention Unit
who numbered about 20 came to the court after the first row subsided.

A Plain Cloth Officer who exchanged words with NDAM supporters was said to
have threatened NDAM supporters with a Pistol.

NDAM supporters, who were now bursting with anger over what they described
an unjustifiable detention, bitterly complained that they cannot understand
why Justice Paul revoked Juwara’s bail application, eventhough the latter
has never jumped bail and had never violated any of the bail conditions.

Juwara was granted bail by Justice Ahmed Belgore of the Banjul High Court,
but the case was transferred to Justice Paul. No reason was advanced for the
transfer of the matter to Justice Paul. However, Juwara’s Counsel, Borry
Touray temporarily withdrew from the case after he filed a petition to the
Chief Justice complaining of what he described as the oppressive nature of
Justice Paul, who he alleged would over rule him before having a gist of
what he wanted to say. Justice Paul revoked Juwara’s bail on Thursday.

_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone ‘switch’ rules are taking effect — find out more here.
http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

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

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~