By Landing Ceesay
The Inspector General of Police (IGP) has submitted a 13-paragraph affidavit in opposition to a stay of execution motion filed by Brikama Area Council (BAC) Chairman, Yankuba Darboe, in his ongoing sedition trial.
Chairman Darboe faces two criminal charges brought against him by the IGP, stemming from an incident on February 10, 2021. The police allege that he used disparaging language aimed at the President of The Gambia, Adama Barrow, and the Gambian judiciary.
On September 12, 2024, Darboe was set to begin his defense after the High Court rejected his previous application. However, his counsel, Lamin S. Camara, informed the court that a motion was filed in August 2024 and was still awaiting a return date.
The motion, filed by Chairman Darboe, is supported by a 20-paragraph affidavit. In response, the IGP submitted a 13-paragraph affidavit, sworn by Malang Jarju, Deputy Commissioner of Prosecutions and Legal Affairs Unit of the Gambia Police Force. The affidavit explains the IGP’s reasons for opposing the stay of execution motion.
“I have been shown a motion dated the 12th August 2024 by Commissioner Abdoulie Sanneh with an affidavit in support deposed to by Isatou Ceesay Pupil Barrister at Dandimayo Law Chambers; I have read on the face of the said motion in which Counsel for the Applicant is seeking two (2) prayers for consideration by this Honorable Court; the said motion is illegal, incompetent, and lacks merits and should be dismissed accordingly,” Deputy Commissioner Jarju stated on behalf of the IGP.
Deputy Commissioner Jarju further contended that paragraph 14 of Darboe’s affidavit is false, as no competent appeal has been filed at the Court of Appeal by the accused.
“This court has no power to grant the prayers sought on the face of the motion by the Accused/Applicant in this case; the motion raised serious constitutional and jurisdictional issues which this Honorable court cannot answer and or grant the reliefs sought; it will be unfair to the prosecution and a miscarriage of justice to grant the prayers on the motion; the motion filed before this Court is an abuse of process and should be dismissed;
“The justice of this case is to refuse the request for a stay of proceedings and order that the trial against the accused proceeds accordingly as contained in the order of the High Court delivered on the 11th of July 2024; I made this statement to the best of my ability, knowledge and believing same to be true by the Oaths Act of 1835,” Deputy Commissioner deposed.
The case is adjourned to the 8th of October 2024 for a ruling on the motion.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.