By Kemeseng Sanneh (Kexx)
In a stunning legal development, Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the Banjul High Court has acquitted Mamud Bah of all charges related to attempted robbery, ruling that there was insufficient evidence to proceed with a conviction. The court upheld a “no case to answer” submission from the defence, leading to the accused’s discharge.
Bah had been charged with attempting to rob Abdoulie Jallow, allegedly assaulting him in an attempt to steal property valued at D3, 380.00 in the Kanifing Municipality on July 11, 2022. Bah denied the charges, pleading not guilty. The prosecution presented two witnesses and submitted various pieces of evidence, including voluntary and cautionary statements. However, despite these efforts, the defence argued that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case. The defence highlighted that key elements of attempted robbery had not been substantiated.
Justice Jaiteh, in his ruling, emphasized the principles surrounding “no case” submissions, drawing on both Gambian law and common law precedents. He referenced Section 238 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which requires the court to evaluate the sufficiency of evidence after the prosecution’s case. Citing cases like IGABELE v. THE STATE and CEESAY v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, the judge reinforced that a no-case submission is justified when the evidence presented is weak or unreliable.
The court identified multiple flaws in the prosecution’s case, notably the absence of victim testimony. Abdoulie Jallow, the alleged victim, was unable to testify due to disabilities in speech and hearing, hindering the prosecution’s ability to substantiate the alleged assault. Furthermore, contradictory testimony from witness Momodou I. Busso (Pw2), who mistakenly stated that the incident occurred in June instead of July, raised doubts about the accuracy of the evidence. The court also noted the lack of physical evidence, such as the nylon bags and knife allegedly used in the robbery attempt, which were never presented in court.
Justice Jaiteh concluded that the prosecution’s evidence was so “manifestly unreliable” that no reasonable tribunal could safely convict the accused. He underscored the importance of safeguarding against unsafe convictions and protecting the rights of the accused.
“In light of the prosecution’s failure to provide sufficient evidence necessary for a conviction, I stand resolute in my finding that there exists no case for the accused to answer,” Justice Jaiteh stated firmly.
As a result, the court accepted the defence’s submission and acquitted Mamud Bah, acknowledging that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case of attempted robbery.
