Gambiaj.com – (BANJUL, The Gambia) – The High Court on Monday heard detailed testimony from a police investigator as the trial of State v. Sanna Manjang continued, with the prosecution outlining the scope of a joint security investigation into alleged killings in Kanilai.
The State is represented by Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) E.R. Dougan, alongside Counsel Drammeh, M. Jammeh and A. Badjie. The accused, Sanna Manjang, is represented by Counsel A. Sillah.
Joint Investigation Panel
The prosecution called Jali Senghore, a police officer attached to the Brikama Division Crime Unit (West Coast), who testified that in November 2025 a joint investigative panel was constituted to probe allegations against the accused.
According to the witness, the panel brought together officers from the Gambia Police Force, the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), and the Gambia Armed Forces.
He told the court that the police team included Commissioner Pateh Bah, Superintendent Jali Senghore, Inspector J. Sowe and Sergeant Musa Darboe, while the military was represented by Major M. Sanneh and Sergeant Gebril.
The mandate of the panel, he said, was to investigate allegations that the accused was involved in the murder of several individuals in Kanilai village.
Alleged Incident in Kanilai
Senghore testified that investigators first contacted an eyewitness who was present during the alleged incident. The eyewitness was invited for an interview and later led the panel to the purported crime scene in Kanilai, where a physical demonstration of the incident was carried out. Photographs were taken,taken, and exhibits documented.
He identified the alleged victims as Samba Wurry, Bai Dam, and Kajali, whom investigators were told were destitute petty traders operating around the border area, with little or no known family presence in The Gambia.
After completing interviews and field visits, the panel, according to the witness, visited the accused at Mile 2 Central Prison in the presence of an independent witness and the accused’s counsel. During that meeting, the allegations were put to the accused, who denied them.
Legal Objections and Rulings
During evidence-in-chief, objections arose when the witness sought to testify on information allegedly obtained from one Essa Keita. Defence Counsel S.K. Jobe objected, arguing that such testimony amounted to hearsay, as Essa Keita was listed as a prosecution witness and should testify personally.
Deputy DPP Dougan relied on Section 19 of the Evidence Act to argue admissibility, while the defense cited Sections 19(b) and 21. In her ruling, Justice S.K. Jobarteh dismissed the first objection, holding that the testimony amounted to a narration of an interview conducted by the witness, not hearsay.
However, when the witness later attempted to testify on what Essa Keita was told by others, the defence again objected. This time, the court upheld the objection, ruling that the witness could not testify on information relayed to Essa Keita by third parties.
Details From the Investigation
The witness told the court that investigators were shown various locations in Kanilai, including an alleged detention centre, a warding garden, an area near where lions were kept, and a tap from which, according to accounts given to investigators, detainees could allegedly see the accused.
He further testified that investigations suggested Kajali was beheaded while Samba Wurry was stabbed. After concluding the investigation, a case file was prepared and forwarded to the Attorney General’s Chambers, leading to the charging of the accused.
A statement obtained from the accused was tendered by the prosecution without objection from the defence and admitted into evidence as an exhibit.
Cross-Examination
Under cross-examination, the witness stated that he obtained one statement from the accused dated 3 December 2025, but later clarified that another statement was obtained by Inspector Samba J. Sowe on the second day of the accused’s arrest.
He admitted that when investigators visited Kanilai, the accused was not present and was not given the opportunity to accompany them. He maintained that throughout the investigation, the accused denied all allegations.
Senghore also testified that there was a detention center in Kanilai and that the accused was in charge of it by virtue of being the commanding officer of the company stationed there.
When pressed on whether this was confirmed by interviewing other soldiers, he said he interviewed an intelligence officer but declined to disclose further details for security reasons, a position the court accepted.
The witness conceded that he could not recall the names or ranks of some individuals interviewed, nor could he disclose his investigation notes.
He further admitted that he had never seen the alleged victims, did not know their families or places of origin, and had never seen their bodies or graves. He denied the defense’s suggestion that the alleged victims never existed.
Counsel Jobe put it to the witness that he was lying to the court, an allegation the witness denied.
At the conclusion of his testimony, Justice S.K. Jobarteh discharged the witness and adjourned the matter to 24 February 2026 at 12:00 p.m., as the trial continues.
