Affirms Murder Conviction
By Kemeseng Sanneh (Kexx)
The Supreme Court of the Gambia has set aside the death sentence of Yankuba Touray, a former military junta member convicted of the 1995 murder of former Finance Minister Ousman Koro Ceesay, replacing it with life imprisonment. The court ruled that the death penalty was unlawfully imposed, as the killing occurred during a period when capital punishment was legally abolished in the country.
Touray was sentenced to death by hanging by the High Court in 2021, a ruling later affirmed by the Court of Appeal. However, in its judgment delivered Monday, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the sentence violated the Death Penalty (Abolition) Act of 1993, which was in force when the murder was committed on June 24, 1995. The death penalty was only restored on August 10, 1995, through the enactment of the Death Penalty (Restoration) Act.
Citing the provision in the 1995 law that expressly bars the imposition of a death sentence for offenses committed before the law came into effect, the court ruled that the sentence was invalid. “A person shall not be sentenced to death on a charge of murder or treasonable offence committed between the period of enactment of that Act and coming into force of this Act,” the court quoted.
The Supreme Court substituted the death penalty with a sentence of life imprisonment, effective from the date of the original sentencing by the High Court on July 14, 2021.
Despite the reversal of the sentence, the country’s apex court affirmed the murder conviction. Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Awa Bah found that the prosecution had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Touray had participated in the killing of Ceesay, who briefly served as Minister of Finance during the early years of the AFPRC military regime.
The court found that Touray, together with Edward Singhateh, Peter Singhateh, and others, lured Ceesay to Touray’s residence in Kerr Serign, where they assaulted him using a pestle-like object and other weapons until he died. The killing was recounted in vivid testimony by Alagie Kanyi, a former military aide and admitted accomplice who testified as the prosecution’s star witness.
Touray, represented by senior defense lawyer A. Sisohor, filed a 10-point appeal challenging both the conviction and sentence. Central to his appeal was the claim that the courts had relied on uncorroborated and inconsistent testimony from an accomplice witness. He also argued that his alibi was not fairly considered and that the lower courts lacked jurisdiction to impose the death penalty due to its legal status at the time of the crime.
The defense contended that the High Court erred in evaluating the evidence and that the Court of Appeal failed to correct what it called “a perverse decision” by the trial judge. Sisohor insisted that the trial court had placed undue weight on the testimony of Kanyi, who he claimed lacked credibility.
In response, state counsel A.A. Wakawa maintained that the evidence against Touray was compelling and corroborated by independent sources. The State argued that Kanyi was a competent witness whose account was consistent with other pieces of evidence presented during the trial. While defending the conviction and the original sentence, Wakawa acknowledged during Supreme Court proceedings that the legality of the death penalty at the time of the murder was a legitimate issue for review.
The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeal that the accomplice’s testimony was properly corroborated and that Touray’s late-stage alibi lacked the supporting evidence required to be credible. Justice Bah noted that the alibi was only raised during cross-examination and was unsupported by any prior disclosure or witness testimony.
The court also rejected the claim that the lower courts erred in their analysis of the evidence, stating that both the High Court and Court of Appeal had properly assessed the totality of the facts in finding Touray guilty.
However, on the issue of sentencing, the court sided with the Appellant. It concluded that the death penalty could not legally be applied in this case, as the law in force at the time of the murder had abolished such punishment. The Death Penalty (Restoration) Act, which reinstated capital punishment, did not take effect until nearly two months after the crime was committed.
The court emphasized that its ruling applied solely to Touray and did not affect other individuals named in the proceedings — including Edward and Peter Singhateh, Tumbul Tamba, B.K. Jatta, Pa Louis Gomez, and Alagie Kanyi — none of whom were on trial in this case.
The judgment marks the final stage in a landmark legal battle that has gripped the country, one tied to The Gambia’s broader reckoning with abuses committed during the 22-year rule of former President Yahya Jammeh. Touray, who served as a minister and high-ranking member of the Armed Forces Provisional Ruling Council (AFPRC), is one of the few top figures from that era to face accountability in court. Touray could still apply for a review for the Supreme Court to
review its own decision.
His conviction followed years of testimony before the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC), during which witnesses detailed systemic abuses, including political assassinations, torture, and arbitrary detentions. Ceesay’s killing was one of the most high-profile cases revisited by the commission.
