The
defence counsel in the economic crime case involving Sira Wally Ndow-Njai and 9
others yesterday informed the court that they had filed briefs on bail
applications in respect of the 1st, 2nd and 9th accused.
Defence
counsel A.A.B. Gaye and L.S Camara were addressing Justice O. Ottaba of the
Special Criminal Court in Banjul.
The
accused persons are Sira Wally Ndow-Njai, Momodou O.S Badjie, Fafa Sanyang,
Cherno Marena, Seedy Kanyi, Muntaga Momodou Sallah, Momodou Taal, Louie Moses
Mendy and Noah Touray.
When
the case was called, DPP S.H. Barkun appeared for the state alongside deputy
DPP M.B. Abubacarr and A. Yakubu.
The
defendants were represented by senior Counsel A.A.B. Gaye, S.M. Tambadou,
O.M.M. Njie, C. Gaye, L.S. Camara, E. Sanneh, A.N.D. Bensouda, A.
Sisay-Sabally, B.S. Touray, B.S.N. Conteh, Y. Senghore, B. Bouye, E.E. Chima,
C.E. Mene, and S. Sillah.
Senior
Counsel Gaye then informed the court that in the matter of the bail application
for the 1st accused, they had filed their briefs and the state had been served.
L.S.
Camara also said they had filed their briefs in the case of Momodou O.S. Badjie
and the respondent had been served.
DPP
S.H. Barkun responded that he had been served with the briefs of 1st and 2nd
accused, and that they have also filed their briefs in the case of the 9th
accused.
However,
counsel L.S. Camara said they had not been served with the respondent’s briefs
in respect of the 9th accused.
The
DPP said he would serve the defence as soon as possible.
With
regard to the proposed amendment pending before the court for consideration,
the trial judge said they would finish with the cross-examination first.
Responding
to questions from counsel E.E. Chime, representing the 6th accused, the
witness, Bakary Darboe, agreed that he was a member of the 2nd investigative
panel.
“In
the process of your investigation, did you come across the minutes of the
meetings held by the board of directors of GNPC?”
“I
can’t remember coming across the minutes of GNPC Board of Directors.”
“Were
you ever informed that GNPC ever came together as a board to discuss the
importation of petrol from anybody?”
“Yes.”
“Were
you told that GNPC as a body and, in particular, the board of directors ever
held meetings?”
“Yes.”
“Were
you provided with the minutes of the meeting by the board of directors?”
“I
can’t remember.”
“I
am putting it to you that if you were not provided with the minutes of the
board of directors, then your investigation is not complete”
“That
is not correct.”
“I
am further putting it to you that it is through the minutes of the board of
directors that you will be able to know what transpires at the board meeting of
GNPC, in the importation of petrol.”
“That
is not correct.”
“What
do you mean by that is not correct?”
“What
I mean is that you can know the issues discussed by GNPC without the minutes.”
“Were
you made to understand that the said board of directors of GNPC was inaugurated
before they started sitting?”
“Yes.”
“Were
you also made to understand that before their inauguration there was a meeting
involving subsequent directors?”
“I
was not told of that.”
“Were
you able to see the minutes of the inauguration of the GNPC board?”
“No.”
“I
am putting it to you that your investigation is incomplete.”
“That
is not correct.”
The
contract document was shown to the witness in court and he identified it and it
was tendered in court and marked in evidence as an exhibit without objection
from the state.
Hearing
continues today at 3pm.
