Gambiaj.com – (BANJUL, The Gambia) – The High Court of The Gambia has acquitted and discharged Abdoulie Sanyang on charges of arson and interference with judicial proceedings, ending a high-profile legal battle that tested the boundaries of criminal evidence and free speech.
In a landmark judgment delivered on Tuesday, 10 February 2026, Hon. Justice Ebrima Jaiteh ruled that the prosecution failed to bridge the gap between suspicion and proof, asserting that the state’s case fell short of the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard required by law.
A Failure to Link Accused to the Crime
The prosecution had alleged that Sanyang was responsible for the 2016 burning of the APRC Bureau in Kanifing. While Justice Jaiteh acknowledged that the building was indeed unlawfully set on fire, he highlighted a critical void in the state’s evidence: a direct link to the accused.
Despite calling seven witnesses and tendering nine exhibits, the prosecution could not produce financial records, communication logs, or eyewitness testimony placing Sanyang at the scene or proving he orchestrated the attack.
“The prosecution must succeed on the strength of its own evidence,” Justice Jaiteh noted, citing the celebrated legal authority of Woolmington v DPP. “Suspicion, no matter how strong, cannot take the place of proof.”
“Justice Is Not a Cloistered Virtue”
The second charge stemmed from a 2025 interview on West Coast Radio, where Sanyang allegedly made provocative remarks regarding the ongoing trial of The State v. Ousainou Bojang and Amie Bojang. The state argued these comments were “clandestine” and designed to undermine the judiciary.
However, the Court took a firm stance on the side of freedom of expression. Justice Jaiteh ruled that for speech to constitute criminal interference, there must be proof of an intent to obstruct justice—not merely the use of “uncomfortable” or “offensive” language.
Referencing the famous legal precedent Ambard v. Attorney-General for Trinidad and Tobago, the judge remarked, “Justice is not a cloistered virtue and must be permitted to suffer the scrutiny and criticism of ordinary citizens.”
The court further observed that since The Gambia does not operate a jury system, the threshold for “prejudicing” a professional judge is significantly higher. No judicial officer testified to feeling intimidated or influenced by Sanyang’s broadcast.
The Verdict
Concluding the proceedings, Justice Jaiteh maintained that when the state fails to prove the essential ingredients of a crime, the court’s only recourse is to protect the liberty of the individual.
“Where the prosecution fails to establish the essential ingredients of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the court has no discretion but to acquit,” the judge declared.
Abdoulie Sanyang, who testified as his own sole witness, walked out of the courtroom a free man after the dual acquittal.
