(JollofNews) – The Gambia’s minister of Foreign Affairs and Gambian Abroad Thursday sat in the public gallery of the Banjul High Court to hear the judge overrule the objection of former security chiefs against the appointment of special prosecutors.
Ousainou Darboe whose United Democratic Party (UDP) is part of the country’s coalition government and also holds a large majority in the National Assembly, came face to face with the men accused of arresting and beating to death his then organising secretary, Solo Sandeng.
Mr Sandeng died on 15th April 2016 at the National Intelligence Agency’s (NIA) headquarters in Banjul less than 24 hours after he was arrested with a dozen other activists for staging a brief but peaceful protest against the former regime of President Yahya Jammeh at Westfield junction, Serrekunda.
Former NIA bosses including Yankuba Badgie, Saikou Mar Jeng, Haruna Susso, Baboucarr Sallah, Lamin Darboe, Lamin Lang Sanyang, Louis Gomez and Yusupha Jammeh have all denied having a hand in his death.
The men have also strongly objected to the appointment of six private practitioners as public prosecutors by the Attorney General and minister of Justice
They argued that Antouman Gaye, Sheriff Tambadou, Lamin Camara, Racheal Mendy, Combeh Gaye and Yassin Senghore had represented Solo Sandeng in the case of Habeas Corpus and there is a confidential between them and the Sandeng family.
However, the presiding judge, Justice Kumba Sillah-Camara said the special prosecutors are fit and proper to represent the state in the case and their appointment was done in accordance with the law.
She said the court is not interested about the proximity or closeness of the prosecution team to the deceased family but in the diligent prosecution of the case.
“At the end, it is the court that decides based on the evidence produced before it and not whether the mental element of the prosecution is biased or not,” she stated.
The judge added that although the prosecution team had acted for the victim in the previous case and the said victim is the complainant in this case, there is no conflict of interest.
She said the parties in the two cases are different as the case before her is a criminal case and the previous one was a civil matter with different facts.
Justice Sillah-Camara stated that as a presiding judge in this matter, it is her duty to consider the totality of evidence of the parties before deciding on the matter without fear or favour.
The case continues in October.
High time someone give the proceedings the recognition it deserves. Darboe’s presence in the audience gallery is welcome and I hope the culprits and defence understood that they cannot underrate the determination of the people in seeing that Sandeng’s killers pay the price for their callous disregard of human life. Let them come out with facts about events and directiives given leading to the death of Sandeng instead of trying to derail the process.
The “Culprits” as some have claimed, Should face Justice. I am with Fifty percent sure most Gambians would agree with this sentiment. However, My Thoughts inform me that the Dispensation of Justice is not Feelings. It is Anchored in a Body of Legal Codes that Legitimizes the Process. Objective Assesments of the NIA NINE is being Compromised One Step At A Time and Trial. First, the Presence of Ousainou Darbo who is not just any Common Civilian, but the Minister of Foreign Affairs is at the Least Prejudicial and Worst Probable Grounds for a Mistrial. Ousainou Darbo is a Party to the Case as both a Character and Material Witness. He was and is the Party Leader of UDP of which Solo Sandeng was an Official. As such any Semblance of Justice would rule his Presence in the Audience as Objectionable. Given that in a Free, Objective and Unfettered Jurisprudence of Integrity, Ousainou Darbo will be Called by any good Defense Lawyer or even a good Prosecutor as a Material Witness or Party to the Case of the NIA NINE, the Judges’ Decision to Permit Ousainou Darbo to be Present during the Proceedings is Capricious and may be Malicious in Nature. Regardless, it is grounds for an Appeal in the event that the NIA NINE are found guilty. Second, the Judges’ Decision to Allow the same Lawyers who represented the Family of Solo Sandeng in a Civil law Case to “Put on another hat” and represent the NIA NINE who Stand Accused of having a hand in Solo Sandeng’s death, is not only Repugnant, but amounts to Judicial Mal-practice at the Highest Level of “the New Gambia’s” Jurisprudence and Due Process. The judge should Cite the Relevant Section or Part of the Gambian Criminal Code or Common Law Code that her Unprecedented and Uncited Rulings was derived from. Gambians must not be Intimidated by Courts, Lawyers or Judges. The Media, the Civil Societies, NGOS cannot Afford to be Selectively Silent. They must be Vigilant and Ready to Call Out Repugnant Decisions and Rulings when and where they are made in the Gambia of today. SILENCE Breeds Contempt and Malfeasance, Which in turn Breeds Legal Despotism and Arbitrary Justice. Now it is the NIA NINE, tomorrow it may well be I, You and any Gambian. That is not what those who gave the Ultimate Price died for. Did they? Gambian is more than the Sum Total of One Ethnic Group, One Region.
Attempting to influence the cause of justice is illegal.
this ex-spy chief with blood dripping down all two hands, why is he being allowed to hide behind those glasses. If they are not prescriptive glasses, they should be taken away from him, so everyone can at least get a glimpse of the evil lurking therein.
I hope he goes down like led!
The “Culprits” as some have claimed, Should face Justice. I am with Fifty percent sure most Gambians would agree with this sentiment. However, My Thoughts inform me that the Dispensation of Justice is not Feelings. It is Anchored in a Body of Legal Codes that Legitimizes the Process. Objective Assesments of the NIA NINE is being Compromised One Step At A Time and Trial. First, the Presence of Ousainou Darbo who is not just any Common Civilian, but the Minister of Foreign Affairs is at the Least Prejudicial and Worst Probable Grounds for a Mistrial. Ousainou Darbo is a Party to the Case as both a Character and Material Witness. He was and is the Party Leader of UDP of which Solo Sandeng was an Official. As such any Semblance of Justice would rule his Presence in the Audience as Objectionable. Given that in a Free, Objective and Unfettered Jurisprudence of Integrity, Ousainou Darbo will be Called by any good Defense Lawyer or even a good Prosecutor as a Material Witness or Party to the Case of the NIA NINE, the Judges’ Decision to Permit Ousainou Darbo to be Present during the Proceedings is Capricious and may be Malicious in Nature. Regardless, it is grounds for an Appeal in the event that the NIA NINE are found guilty. Second, the Judges’ Decision to Allow the same Lawyers who represented the Family of Solo Sandeng in a Civil law Case to “Put on another hat” and represent the NIA NINE who Stand Accused of having a hand in Solo Sandeng’s death, is not only Repugnant, but amounts to Judicial Mal-practice at the Highest Level of “the New Gambia’s” Jurisprudence and Due Process. The judge should Cite the Relevant Section or Part of the Gambian Criminal Code or Common Law Code that her Unprecedented and Uncited Rulings was derived from. Gambians must not be Intimidated by Courts, Lawyers or Judges. The Media, the Civil Societies, NGOS cannot Afford to be Selectively Silent. They must be Vigilant and Ready to Call Out Repugnant Decisions and Rulings when and where they are made in the Gambia of today. SILENCE Breeds Contempt and Malfeasance, Which in turn Breeds Legal Despotism and Arbitrary Justice. Now it is the NIA NINE, tomorrow it may well be I, You and any Gambian. That is not what those who gave the Ultimate Price died for. Did they? Gambian is more than the Sum Total of One Ethnic Group, One Region.
Mr. Bojang, there is absolutely no cause to worry of mistrials here. Obviously there are victims so we suppose there are culprits without a doubt. In my opinion, Ousainou Darboe as exterior minister can attend the trials in question being the secretary general of the party whose youth leader was cold-bloodedly slain by the said suspects. Ain’t no other form of matured democracy, reconciliation or wounds healing method here, other than trying the suspects for the alleged crimes committed. We must teach to the younger generation that, the Gambia is a country where citizens lives matters very very much.
The mistrial in this case would be when opinionists start ringing a mistrial bell, in a case where every Gambia with at least a pinch of truthfulness in his/her heart knows the accused on the other hand, are liable to being competent witnesses this case for being employees in the premises where the crimes were committed. Gambia cannot just put a state’s murder of citizens under the carpet. The small population shouldn’t be of the impression that we are monstrous killers and savages amongst ourselves.
Mr Sendeng, didn’t have any appeal. Mr Sendeng may have asked why are you killing me, but if he did, they were not listening. Neither was the ultimate authority Yahya Bloody Jammeh…who sent 9 prisoners to be executed. This is The Gambia. As for Mr Darboe, is it not a fact that Mr Darboe is or may be a material witness and if so, what is he doing in the gallery ? Does this not prejudice his position if he is called to be a witness ? Sidi Bojang makes a lot of sense.
Bourne; do you not think Mr Darboe being in court, is at least intimidating ? Seeing as he was arrested with Mr Sendeng and is leader of his Party the UDP and also the second highest ranking member of government. Their is no Vice President.
Kara; I agree with you. Do you also think that any female wearing a hijab in court should have to reveal her face ?
Come on Mike.., I need to sufficiently understand why Mr. Darboe’s presence in this court would look intimidating.
Is it the fundamental constitution that bars government executives from attending such court cases much more if they have a direct interest therein?
I am not a constitutional or legal expert at all, as I always make it clear but rather taking examples from the advanced democracies of the civil societies I know about or lived in.
Now, a citizen or probably citizens were tortured and murdered in the premises of a so-called intelligence agency, and we have to doubt if the director and other top officers of that so-called agency could be linked to those atrocities… Obviously in my opinion, they are potential witnesses even if there is all reliable evidence that they were sleeping at home when those tortures and murders were being committed. It is therefore absolutely unnecessary to be assumptive reading out what might be the point of reasoning of fellow citizens as far as this issue is concerned, but rather should express our own senses of constitutionalism with regards to the ongoing trial of the Nia 9, simple and straight forward. How these trials unfold determines how fast the terrible monster mastermind, Yayah Jammeh, will be extradited I guess. Isn’t it sure?
What the wreck the maturity of our democracy means??
Mike, just as an example…, what do you think would be expected of the Mi5 chief or would have happened to him, if some alleged terrorists got tortured and killed by field agents, in an illegal interrogation process at the Mi5 complexes, once the said incident got busted?
Do you not think such a situation can lead to, or push for the resignation of certain executives of government if it were in the atmosphere of a meaningful democracy?
Come on, you don’t have to get over ambiguous about it like you seeing what kids can never be able to see. Please help them see.
I detest the NIA as an organization and the evil men and women that served Yahya in this criminal agency. My opinion is that they are ALL guilty and should spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison. But that is my opinion. In a democratic Gambia guilt and innocence are determined based on evidence. Even the worst in our society are guaranteed due process, a vigorous defense and protection of their civil rights as Gambian citizens.
First Lawyer Darboe should know better. His presence in that courtroom is prejudicial and he should have been ejected by any impartial or competent judge. Second it is a conflict to have lawyers who have represented Solo Sandeng previously as members of the prosecution team. One would think that is Law 101. Guess not. We need to start making decisions with care and not create grounds for a mistrial, if it’s not too late.
What some of us are doing in this forum is what GRTS should have been doing : having debates on issues of paramount importance to Gambians. Those who follow the various opinions and debaters on Jollofnews.com are happy that most topical issues are meticulously addressedwithout prejudice. I agree with Scale, Dr Sarr and Sidi N. Bojang that Lawyer Darbo ‘s presence is prejudicial to the case . In my opinion, it would be difficult to prove in court how these nine people are physically tied to the case. Those who actually committed the murder cannot be identified as some have fled the country. The man who gave the order and provided them with a ram to celebrate is in exile. He is the best person to answer to the charges. My other concern is why the other murders committed by monster have not been given the same importance as this one. ?
Hahaha the trial hasn’t started yet and Darbo went there to hear the ruling regarding the appointment of Gaye and others so what’s the fuss about it? Remember yaya jammeh attending the gold dust case involving him!! U guys forget so easily or is it about the future president Darboe?
Just incase, I was in a dream. Did former President Yaya Jammeh go into Exile on or about January 20 or 21, 2017? Did Adama Barrow Ousainou Darbo and Mai Fatty and the Overseer of the Vice Presidency form a Government Following the Impasse and the Swearing-in of Adama Barrow as President while he and the UDP Leadership were in Senegal where they Absconded to leaving Hon. Halifa Sallah in charge of the Affairs of the Country? Did Gambia not have an Election for the National Assembly Members? Are they not Duely Elected and Sworn? Did President Barrow not Form a Cabinet and have them Duely Sworn? Does The Gambia have a Government? The answer to this question is in the Affirmative, Yes. Now, let me ask one last question, how long would former President Yaya Jammeh’s regime or Jammeh’s Ghosts be at some Gambians disposal to Utilize as an Excuse and an Explanation for all Malfeasance and Official Wrong Doing? Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ousainou Darbo Should know better and Do the Right Thing and Refrain from acting and behaving like a Despot. He is after all by all accounts a Lawyer and Should know that his presence in the Court for the NIA NINE has Poison, Tainted the Case irrivocably. As those Gambians who Have Betrayed the Cause of Gambia Has Decided and turned it into Gambia has a CHOOSEN Segment of Ethnic Group that can do No Wrong, Please Allow yourself to Reflect. Reflection is Good for the Soul. Do not Enable Despotism and Unilateralist Decision Making in the Gambia of Now and of All Time. We did not forget, we thought that we learnt a lesson. I hope so. God I pray and hope so.
Bourne; I think it highly reassuring that all commentators on Jollof News bring light and not darkness to this fundamental issue of procedural law. We should not forget the main issue, in that whilst in detention and under the care of the State. Mr Sendeng was seen to be in considerable distress with definite signs that he was in the process of being tortured. He was without medical assistance and was in the process of being illegally murdered. Those in charge had a public duty of care to Mr Sendeng, which can be proportioned in various degrees of personal and professional responsibility. In my opinion, this act of senseless extra Judicial killing, becomes the ultimate responsibility of The former President, The Vice President, some Ministers, and those in authority at the NIA and those officers who together or singularly, carried out this heinous crime. To suggest that those responsible are less or more guilty than others, is something the Law must address, though myself I think there are sufficient grounds to believe all mentioned should be charged. The question of proving the guilt is a matter for the Police and the the Prosecution team and the court to decide. I think it would be wrong if only one or two defendants should be saddled with the guilt of this far reaching case.But each has the right to a robust defence. As for the appearance in the court by Mr Darboe. I think this is unhelpful. Whilst one can empathise and sympathises with his close interest. Mr Darboe must use wisdom and deliberation on assisting the free flow of proceedings in this highly charged and emotional case. The word ” prejudicial” has been used frequently in comments. My worry would be if the court allows its sound judgement to be affected by Mr Darboe’s presence. In that his high position and status in the Gambian government, may be seen to override his close position to the defendants in this court room. I am not a lawyer, but I think their is a definite cause for concern and unhindered and impartial justice. Those accused stand to lose their freedom for the rest of their lives. These are serious issues, that require to determine a man’s guilt or innocence. These proceedings must not become a farce. They must also be free of politics. The danger to justice would be if only the lower ranking officers were to carry the guilt for those at the top of this conspiracy to torture and murder. The other issue is the poor physical condition of those tortured, that contributed to death. Though myself, I don’t think that this can be considered, as a form of mitigation. This process sanctioned or ignored by government, was not a singular case. Others were tortured as a process as were confirmed by an Independent ecowas court, in the case of Chief Manneh and Musa Saidykhan. Chief Manneh was reported as being in the Royal Victoria Hospital with breathing difficulties. The evidence of torture and disappearances and extraJudicial killings had a long and well documented history in The Gambia carried out by the NIA and other government approved agencies. May I express my condolences to the families and victims. I still find it hard to believe that Gambians did this to Gambians and over such a long period.
Thanks Mike, saying you think; its highly reassuring that all commentators here bring light and not darkness to this fundamental issue of procedural law. I am very much convinced, nothing is going to get too late or derailed in the procedures as some commentators doubt, if it will. My belief is, the process will deal with the ‘roof top’ of the conspiracies coming down to the ‘roots’ of it, which would definitely result to the extradition of the chief mastermind and key conspirators in these horrible atrocities of the country’s history. I don’t think anyone is refuting the vitality of due process of the rule of law in the new Gambia of renewed hopes and expectations.
But, if in fact the judiciary system is still not an independent and trustworthy one, then who knows, those suspicious of Ousainou’s attendance of the court proceedings have a reason to be…I only took for granted that the now judiciary system is a reliable one despite the fact that there are distasteful shortfalls of the Barrow administration, that are overseen by it.
Yes indeed my good friend. The Gambia and it’s institutions and governance may also be on trial.The world is watching,,,,, we are the witness.
This case should have to be conclude now there’s full of evidence solo sandeng arrested on the 14 and on the 15 we heard that he was dead .And he died in the hands of the NIA so that’s clear evidence so let it be concluded and sentence this idiots people’s.