Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the High Court
By Landing Ceesay
Honorable Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the Gambia’s High Court is set to preside over the highly publicized murder trial of Kumba Sinyan, the accused in the tragic death of her fiancé, Lamarana Jallow. The trial will begin today, marking Justice Jaiteh’s first involvement in this case.
Kumba Sinyan, a young entrepreneur, faces a charge of murder under Section 187 of the Criminal Code (Revised Laws of The Gambia, 2009). The prosecution contends that on or around September 14, 2022, at The Friendship Hostel in Bakau, Sinyan, with malice aforethought, caused the death of Lamarana Jallow by fatally injuring him. This crime, under Section 188 of the Criminal Code, carries the gravest penalty.
Previously, the case was under the jurisdiction of Hon. Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh, but due to her six-month maternity leave, it has now been reassigned to Justice Jaiteh.
On June 26, 2024, Kumba Sinyan began her defense, recounting the events leading up to the death of Lamarana Jallow. In a poignant moment, she admitted to killing him but claimed it was an act of self-defense.
Meanwhile, her lawyer, Counsel Sagar Thomas-Twum, is facing disciplinary scrutiny by the General Legal Council (GLC) after disregarding an order from Hon. Justice Jobarteh. On July 31, 2024, Counsel Sagar refused to withdraw a question in court and instructed her client not to answer any questions posed by the court. The issue arose when Justice Jobarteh asked Kumba Sinyan to provide the contact details of Awa Faal, a potential witness. Counsel Sagar argued that revealing these details might jeopardize her client’s defense, but Justice Jobarteh insisted that the question be answered openly in court. Despite this, Counsel Sagar maintained her stance, preventing Kumba Sinyan from responding.
In the courtroom, a tense exchange unfolded as Hon. Justice Jobarteh asserted her position firmly.
“You either withdraw the question or it is answered as it is. The names and phone numbers of the witnesses should be given in full. The accused has been mentioning the names of other people in open court. So why can’t she do the same with this one? What is wrong with this one?” Hon. Justice Jobarteh said.
In response, Counsel Sagar stated, “Since the beginning of this trial, we have been treated unfairly. We have a very unusual defence in this court. It is the constitutional right of the accused to have a fair defence,”
Justice Jobarteh countered, “If you feel or think that this court is depriving your client of her rights, you can go and appeal it. But you cannot tell this court what to do,” Hon. Justice Jobarteh told Counsel Sagar.
As the exchange grew more heated, Counsel Sagar maintained that her client, Kumba Sinyan, would not answer the question and subsequently applied for an adjournment. However, Justice Jobarteh denied the application, escalating tensions in the courtroom.
“Counsel, I am not adjourning this case. Your client has been calling names including doctors since she started her defence. So what is stopping her from mentioning the details of this particular witness and their details? This is an open court, and it is either you withdraw your question or the accused (Kumba Sinyan) answer the question as it is in the court,” Hon. Justice Jobarteh told Counsel Sagar.
Counsel Sagar then drew a comparison to the prosecution’s case, arguing that the prosecution had not been required to compel their witnesses to testify in open court, highlighting what she viewed as a double standard.
“My lady, the prosecution never comes to the court to apply to bring their witnesses in an open court. So why would you ask me to reveal the details of my witnesses in an open court? If I do that, anyone can call these witnesses, and it infringes their rights,” Counsel Sagar told the court.
In response to Counsel Sagar’s application for adjournment, State Counsel Mammy Sanyang argued before the court that the defence had sufficient time to prepare their case without interference.
“Since the 26th of June, the defence has opened there without any pressure. The phone was given to the defence for far too long, therefore they had ample time to go through the phone and take whatever they wanted. The defence did not take what they wanted from the phone until they tendered the phone into evidence. So it is very unnecessary for the defence to come and unnecessarily argue over the same phone they tendered into evidence. I think what the defence is doing right now is prejudicial to the matter,” Counsel Sanyang told the court.
Justice Jobarteh denied the adjournment application submitted by Kumba Sinyan’s lawyer and directed that Kumba either respond to the question or have it withdrawn by Counsel Sagar.
Despite this, Kumba Sinyan’s lawyer informed the court that her client would not answer any questions and that she would also not withdraw the question.
In response, Hon. Justice Jobarteh announced a brief recess.
After approximately 10 to 15 minutes, Justice Jobarteh returned to the courtroom and adjourned the case. Before adjourning, she issued a stern caution to Kumba Sinyan’s lawyer for defying her orders in open court.
“Counsel’s refusal to obey the court orders is not only disrespectful but make me to question whether she is fit to be a legal professional. I want to order for the closure of the defence case, but I advised myself that the accused should not be punished for the action of her lawyer. Therefore, I will refer the case to the General Legal Council for disciplinary hearing and actions on this matter,” Hon. Justice Jobarteh informed the court.
Hon. Justice Jobarteh adjourned the case to October 24, 2024.
Since then, the case has not been mentioned in court, as Justice Jobarteh is currently on a six-month maternity leave.
The case file has since been transferred to High Court Judge Hon. Justice Ebrima Jaiteh, who will now preside over it. For the first time since July 31, 2024, the case is scheduled for a hearing today.