Gambiaj.com – (BANJUL, The Gambia) – The High Court in Banjul has dismissed in its entirety an appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of Banta Jaiteh, Bakary Bojang, and Ensa E.K. Badjie, thereby affirming the decision of the Magistrates’ Court, which had cleared them of all charges.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Ebrima Jaiteh, brings to a close criminal proceedings that began in 2013 and spanned more than a decade.
The court noted that throughout the trial and appeal process, the respondents consistently maintained their innocence, appeared before the courts whenever required, and complied fully with all procedural conditions.
Following the delivery of the judgment, State Counsel S.L. Jobarteh, who was absent when the ruling was read, entered the courtroom and applied for the respondents to be remanded in custody or admitted to bail pending a further appeal.
He relied on Sections 325(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 2025, arguing that an oral notice of intention to appeal obliged the court to make orders to secure the respondents’ attendance.
The application was strongly opposed by Defence Counsel L.K. Mboge, who argued that the respondents had already been acquitted by two courts of competent jurisdiction after enduring more than 10 years of litigation.
He told the court that the men had never attempted to evade justice and that subjecting them to remand or bail conditions after their acquittal would be manifestly unjust.
In his ruling, Justice Jaiteh acknowledged that the State has a statutory right to appeal against an acquittal under the Criminal Procedure Act. However, he stressed that such provisions must be applied with caution and not in a manner that effectively punishes individuals who have been lawfully acquitted.
The court observed that the respondents were “doubly acquitted” and had lived under the shadow of criminal charges since 2013. It further noted that at the time the State made its application, no written petition of appeal had been filed as required by law, and that State Counsel had not been present when the judgment was delivered.
Justice Jaiteh ruled that remanding the respondents would serve no legitimate purpose and would undermine the interests of justice.
Nonetheless, he said the court was procedurally bound to comply with Section 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act once an oral notice of appeal was given.
The court therefore declined to remand the respondents and instead granted them self-bail. Each respondent was ordered to deposit a valid national identification card with the Principal Registrar of the High Court for a period of 30 days.
The judge ruled that if the State fails to file a written petition of appeal within that period, the self-bail will automatically lapse and the respondents will stand fully discharged.
In concluding, Justice Jaiteh cautioned the prosecution against announcing an intention to appeal without first carefully considering the judgment being challenged, warning that such conduct risks undermining public confidence in the administration of justice.
