Cross-Examination of Drug Law Enforcement Officer Continues in Magistrate Colley and Co. Trial
Magistrate Colley at the high court
Lawyer L.K. Mboge resumed the cross-examination of Abdoulie Ceesay, an officer of the Drug Law Enforcement Agency, The Gambia (DLEAG), in the ongoing trial involving former Magistrate Ebrima Janko Colley, Kanifing Magistrate Court Registrar Ridwan Othman, and Court Clerk Mariama Jankey Tamba. The accused are facing charges of theft, fraud, breach of trust, dealing with prohibited drugs, and neglect of official duty.
During the proceedings, Lawyer Mboge presented two documents—a letter addressed to the Chief Justice and a response concerning an exhibit of 52 blocks of cocaine—and requested the witness to verify whether they were the same documents he had sent to the Chief Justice. In response, Ceesay confirmed the authenticity of the documents, identifying one as his letter and the other as the reply from the Chief Justice’s office.
Mboge subsequently applied to submit the documents as evidence, a motion that was unopposed by the prosecution. Justice Aryee admitted the documents into evidence and marked them as exhibits D1 and D2.
The defense lawyer then presented the charge sheet to the witness, seeking confirmation regarding the arrest date of one of the accused persons, Babucarr Muhammed Sallah. Ceesay verified the charge sheet and stated that Sallah was arrested on September 6, 2023, and formally charged on September 23, 2023.
Lawyer Mboge asked, “Can you recall the plea of the accused?” The witness responded, “If I can recall, the accused initially entered a plea of not guilty but later changed it to guilty.” Lawyer Mboge inquired, “Did you know why he changed his mind?” The witness replied, “No, I do not know.”
The lawyer asked, “You confirmed to the court that the drugs were analyzed?” The witness responded positively, “Yes, that is why the analytical report was issued.”
“Can you remember the date of the analytical report?” Lawyer Mboge inquired. The witness responded, “No, I cannot recall the date as I do not have the analytical report with me here,”
“My lord, with the permission of the court, I will apply to hand over the analytical report to the witness for confirmation,” Lawyer Mboge sought.The presiding judge approved the application, and the witness was presented with the document. After reviewing it, the witness responded, “I cannot confirm the document because it did not come from our office; rather, it came from a defence lawyer. We have our analytical report in our office stamp.”
Lawyer Mboge continued, “You made references to the two documents, which are relevant to the case, the weighing and the analytical report. Can you provide it to the court?” The witness replied, “My lord, I am not the agency, and the document is available at the agency (DLEAG). I am currently on leave.”
Lawyer Mboge pointed out, “This letter addressed to the Chief Justice is dated October 15, 2023. The time from when the case concluded to when you made the request is almost 20 days. Why did it take so long?” The witness answered, “I cannot answer that; the instruction came from the authority.”
Lawyer Mboge then asked, “From the date of October 4, 2023, when the exhibit was analyzed, where was the drug kept?” The witness replied, “It was at the exhibit management unit at the DLEAG.”
Lawyer Mboge stated, “So, it’s the DLEAG officer who transported the drug from your office for testing at the lab and brought it back to your office.” The witness confirmed, “My lord, I know that it is the DLEAG office that is in charge of the storage of drugs.”
Lawyer Mboge put forth, “I am putting it to you that it’s the officer who took the 52 blocks for testing.” The witness replied, “No, the 52 blocks were not taken; only a sample was.”
“It’s not possible for the DLEAG officer to tamper with the drug,” Lawyer Mboge assumed. The Director of Public Prosecutions, A.M. Yusuf, objected that the court is a court for evidence, not assumption and the objection was sustained by the Judge.
Lawyer Mboge continued, “So when it was analyzed, the results were inconclusive?” The witness replied, “I am not an analyst, so I don’t know.””Did you test the 52 blocks of drugs before they were entered into evidence?” Lawyer Mboge asked. The witness responded, “In court, when the exhibit management brought the 52 blocks, I confirmed them. If that is what you mean by testing, then yes.”
“Do you know the colour of the blocks in the carton?” Lawyer Mboge inquired. The witness stated, “I cannot tell the colour; they were in a carton taped.”
“Can you tell the court whether the 52 blocks were tested separately?” Lawyer Mboge asked. The witness replied, “I cannot recall, as I was not the officer responsible for testing.”
“On the first day of the case, when the accused pleaded guilty, did you go back to check the drugs?” Lawyer Mboge pressed. The witness clarified, “It wasn’t on the first day of the case when the accused pleaded guilty. It was when the second day of the trial he changed his plea to guilty and the drugs were brought for fact and forfeiture.”
“Did you make a statement in this matter at the police?” Lawyer Mboge asked. The witness answered, “Yes, I made a statement.”
“My lord, I apply for his statement to be provided by the state,” Lawyer Mboge requested, noting that there are two statements. The application was granted, and Director of Public Prosecutions, A.M. Yusuf, was asked to provide it; while searching, Lawyer Mboge continued to ask another question.
“Can you confirm to the court that there was one analytical report regarding the 52 blocks?” The witness responded, “Yes, my lord, for the case I prosecuted, there was only one analytical report, but after the case, there was another analytical report.”
“So, you combined all the 52 blocks in one test?” Lawyer Mboge inquired. The witness reiterated, “As I said, I am just a prosecutor, not an analyst.”
Lawyer Mboge concluded, “So, in your 19 years of experience, you don’t know that samples are extracted from all the 52 blocks.”Before responding, the presiding judge noted that the allocated time had elapsed. As a result, the case was adjourned to Tuesday for continuation.
The case involves state charges against Ebrima Janko Colley and Ridwan Othman for conspiracy to commit a felony, contrary to Section 368 of the Criminal Code. The prosecution alleges that in October 2023, at the Kanifing Magistrate’s Court, the two conspired to steal 45 blocks of cocaine, which had been tendered as exhibits in a criminal case.
On the second count, Colley and Othman are charged with theft, contrary to Section 245 and punishable under Section 257 of the Criminal Code. It is alleged that they stole the 45 blocks of cocaine from the court.
The third count includes charges of fraud and breach of trust, contrary to Section 112 of the Criminal Code, as well as dealing in prohibited drugs, contrary to Section 33 of the Drug Control Act.
Additionally, Mariama Jankey Tamba faces a charge of neglect of official duty, contrary to Section 113 of the Criminal Code. She is accused of failing to mark 52 blocks of cocaine that were tendered as exhibits in a criminal case.
Magistrate Colley and his co-accused have all pleaded not guilty, denying the allegations against them.