Oct 4, 2010, 3:52 PM
Mr. Alieu Ceesay, the Head of Technical Services at the Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA) yesterday appeared before Principal Magistrate Emmanuel Nkea to testify in the ongoing trial of Awa Trawally, a former employee of GRA.
In his testimony, Mr. Ceesay told the court that he has been working for GRA since 1981, and that he knew the accused person who has worked under him as Manifest Officer. He told the court that he couldn't ascertain the actual duration the accused person had worked with the Authority.
Ceesay told the court that Mr. Baba Trawally, the former Commissioner of GRA sometimes in 2009, brought the petition to his notice, and he did respond to the said letter by writing.
According to him, Commissioner of Customs told him that the accused has just left his office regarding her promotion, alleging that GRA's promotion is not fair.
The Defence Counsel H. Gaye put it to him that the accused person has been working for 19 years. She further put it to him that when the witness was giving his testimony, he mentioned in his evidence that the accused person went to the Commissioner of Customs to complain about her promotion during which she used abusive language against top officials of the Authority.
Defence Counsel further put it to the witness that the Commissioner of Customs had instructed him and one Mr. Johnson to write a report against the accused person. In reply, the witness told the court that he wrote against the accused person's conduct.
Defence Counsel further put it to the witness that they had conspired among themselves to elbow out the accused person from GRA. In reply, the witness answered in the negative.
When put to him whether it is correct that the issue of staff is the responsibility of the Human Resources Department, the witness told the court that the particular case is a disciplinary one.
Further put to him as to whether he is familiar with the GRA Code of Conduct as a senior staff, Ceesay replied in the positive.
Quizzed as to the reaction of the Human Resource Department after writing against the accused person, Ceesay also told the court that the accused was called by the disciplinary committee.
This, however, was totally denied by the Defence Counsel.
The witness maintained that he was reliably informed by the deputy legal officer that the accused was called by the committee.
Case continues today.