The
Banjul High Court presided over by Justice E.O. Dada yesterday convicted and
ordered the arrest of Taranga FM Managing Director Alajie Abdoulie Ceesay.
On
counts 1 and 2, which were consolidated as count 1 by the judge, he was
sentenced to 1-year imprisonment and a fine of D100,000.
On
counts 3, 4, 5 and 6 also consolidated as count 2, he was sentenced to 1-year
imprisonment and a fine of D100,000.
In
default of paying the fines, he would serve 2 years in prison.
On
count 7 consolidated as count 3, which was about false publication, he was
sentenced to 2 years in prison.
The
sentences are to run consecutively, and without hard labour.
The
trial judge said in view of the fact that the convict has ran away from his
case, an order would be served on the IGP to apprehend and arrest him as a
fugitive to be brought to serve his sentence.
The
sentences shall take effect when the convict is in the country.
Abdoulie
Ceesay was facing 7 counts of seditious intention and false publication.
When
the matter was called for judgment, counsel B. Jeng appeared for the state,
whilst C. Gaye appeared for the state.
Delivering
her ruling, the trial judge said the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges
and, whilst the trial was going on, the accused escaped and ran away from his
case while being admitted at the hospital.
She
added that the prosecution in proving their case called 4 witnesses and tendered
exhibits.
She
added that PW2 testified in court, but before the defence could conclude their
cross-examination, the witness left the jurisdiction.
She
said the defence then applied for PW2’s evidence to be expunged since the
witness was not available for cross-examination.
The
DPP objected on the grounds that the evidence was relevant in this case.
At
the closure of the prosecution’s case, the defence filed a no-case-to-answer
submission, which was dismissed on the grounds that there was a prima facie
case against the accused.
She
added that the accused was then called upon to enter his defence, but counsel
for the accused informed the court that the accused opted to remain silent as
in exercising his constitutional right to remain silent.
The
trial judge said that the court then proceeded to address, and on the day of
adoption of addresses the accused was absent.
She
said a prison officer then informed the court that the accused escaped while
receiving treatment at the EFSTH.
The
application by the defence that the trial could not proceed in the absence of
the accused was dismissed, and briefs were adopted.
The
DPP, in his address, said that the evidence adduced in court was sufficient
enough to show that a prima facie case had been laid against the accused
person.
The
DPP further said since the accused had opted to remain silent, the evidence
adduced by the prosecution witnesses remained unchallenged and were deemed
admitted.
He
urged the court to proceed and convict the accused person.
The
DPP added that wherein the prosecution had laid a prima facie case against the
accused persons, it was up to the accused to convince the court why he should
not be convicted.
Senior
Counsel Gaye, in her address, said the DPP’s application was misconceived because
the accused had constitutional rights to remain silent.
Counsel
Gaye said that in order to prove that the seditious materials were sufficient
enough to warrant conviction, the question was whether the alleged materials
were seditious.
Counsel
said the author of the material had advised people to stay at home, which was
calm and not violent.
Counsel
argued that it could not be certain that the accused had seditious intention by
sending messages to two ladies he was closely related to.
Counsel
said sending messages to two persons did not amount to false publication.
The
trial judge said from the totality of the case, it was a fact that the accused
did not testify in the case and the only material before the court was the
evidence of the prosecution witnesses and exhibits tendered.
That
the witness who did not present herself for cross-examination did not mean that
it was inadmissible.
She
said she would rely on the evidence from PW2 that she and the accused exchanged
messages, but she chose not to rely on the rest of PW2’s evidence for the fact
that she did not conclude cross-examination.
It
was her considered view that any citizen of The Gambia who receives that
message would not take it lightly, barely six months after a failed coup.
She,
therefore, held that the message was inciting treason and commotion and,
therefore, it was seditious.
She
said every message on social media is all on the internet, which is on the
World Wide Web.
It
was her considered view, and she held it boldly, that any message on the
internet is publication.
“It
is my conclusion that the accused was rightly charged with sedition and false
publication. This is a proper case to convict. I, therefore, reduced the 7
counts to three.
Counts
1 and 2 as count 1, 3 to 6 as counts 2 and 7 as count 3.
“The
accused is convicted, and I call upon counsel for plea of mitigation before
passing sentence.”
In
her plea of mitigation, Counsel C. Gaye informed the court that the convict was
a first-time offender.
She
said the convict is 26-year-old and has learned his lesson on how to use social
media.
She
pleaded for the court not to impose custodial sentence on the convict.
The
accused was subsequently convicted and sentenced as reported above.
