By Kebba AF Touray
The former Sheriff, Justice Tabally, on Thursday 31st July 2025, testified before the National Assembly’s Special Select Committee investigating the disposal of assets belonging to ex-President Yahya AJJ Jammeh. Tabally is now a high court judge.
Explaining how the Sheriff’s Office operated, Tabally said that bailiffs—assigned to the relevant court—would conduct sales and report back. “If accepted as the highest bidder, as per the valuation, the bailiff would return and would report the return of auction sales. The Sheriff would now communicate the bid on the return itself, then advise the bidder to effect the payment to a designated bank account,” he said. If the offer was not accepted, the sale would be abandoned and the item re-advertised, unless the court had fixed a sale price.
When asked about receipts for buyers, Tabally said, “No. The receipts are not issued to the buyers on the ground, generally, they were advised that if they require receipts they should come to the office at a subsequent date to collect their official receipts. What they received on the ground is the note indicate the amount they have paid and the number of cattle they have bought for easy passage facilitation.” He confirmed that these were handwritten notes and added, “Yes, when I assumed there was a directive following an audit exercise at the office of the sheriff, that we are not allowed to use manual receipt.”
Asked who gave this directive, he replied, “My immediate predecessor, was then elevated to Judicial Secretary, who informed me that henceforth all the payments should be made at the bank designated accounts or deposit be made there, because account has been opened at the central bank in the name of the Sheriff where you deposit all the payments.” Tabally named the predecessor as Landing Sanneh and said this was also confirmed by the accountant at the time.
He said the only Sheriff account in use was the Central Bank deposit account, while 12 others had been closed before his tenure. “If deposit is made there on the proceed from the sale, you carry that deposit slip to the accountant’s office, who is obliged to confirm payment and issues the receipts,” he said.
Describing the Kanilai sale as chaotic, he added that they were escorted by security officers. Counsel Kah reminded him of his previous statement that advertising the sale would alert those in control of the animals. He asked whether this consideration wasn’t defeated when Alieu Jallow contacted the farm manager to inform them of the Sheriff’s visit. Tabally admitted, “That could also lead to the people in charge of the cattle put on notice, but that did not occur to me.”
Asked whether they attempted to inspect the location of the livestock, Tabally revealed operational constraints. “The Attorney General Chamber did not pay a dim to facilitate our movement.” He said he wrote a letter requesting fuel from the Solicitor General, who never responded. When Counsel pointed out the letter was missing from the documents submitted, Tabally replied, “It may have not been there but I vividly remember I wrote this letter because it in our interest to be able to carry out this function, for them to facilitate our transportation, and Mr. Jallow can bear me witness.”
Referring to paragraph 5 of Tabally’s statement, Counsel noted that Mr. Alieu Jallow facilitated movement to sale sites and “even carried some bailiff in his own car.” Counsel cited a High Court order dated 22nd May 2017, which placed the livestock under the control of the Gambia Livestock Marketing Agency (GLMA). The order stated, “All the Livestock held by or in possession or control of the respondent’s servants, agents, associates and family members otherwise howsoever be and are hereby seized pursuant to this order and to kept under the control of GLMA, pending the conclusion of the investigation initiated by the Attorney General.”
Counsel emphasized that this showed Alieu Jallow was not the receiver. Tabally agreed. A subsequent High Court order stated the Sheriff should conduct the livestock sale and be assisted by GLMA. Counsel challenged Tabally, saying, “You failed to ensure that that happened, but to also assume that Alieu Jallow was the receiver and have him highly involved in the transaction is very worrying for me.” Tabally admitted, “Is erroneous on our part. I did not pay attention specifically as to the mandate of Alieu Jallow, when he is exited as receiver at the time. I did not pay attention.”
Asked how Jallow came into the picture if he was no longer receiver, Tabally said, “It is responsibility on all of them, and Mr. Jallow as well,” and repeated, “It is an error on my part. I did not pay attention to when his mandate as receiver ended by virtue of this order.”
Counsel asked how the Sheriff’s Office determined the value of livestock without expertise or a valuation report. Tabally responded, “We relied on the advice of the person on the ground, as well as Mr. Alieu Jallow.” Asked to name that person, he said, “Mr. Kora. I don’t know his first name.”
Justice Tabally is expected to reappear today, Friday 1st August 2025, to continue his testimony.
