Mr. Jaja Cham, the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Kanifing Municipal Council (KMC), has filed an appeal with the Gambia Court of Appeal, contesting the Local Government Commission of Inquiry’s decision to incarcerate him at Mile II Central Prison.
For purported intimidation and interference with the Commission’s witnesses, Mr. Cham, who had appeared before the Commission on numerous occasions, was sentenced to Mile II Central Prison. He is contesting this decision, arguing that the Commission’s action is not substantiated by any law in The Gambia.
The Commission exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing an order for the immediate arrest and committal of the Appellant (Jaja Cham) at Mile II Central Prisons in response to an application submitted in accordance with Section 106(1)() of the Criminal Code Cap 10.01. Jaja Cham asserted that these orders were ultra vires, null, and void.
Mr. Cham asserted that the Commission of Inquiry is not granted any criminal jurisdiction under the Constitution, the Commission of Inquiry Act (Cap. 30:01), or any other law in the country.
He contended that the Commission of Inquiry is not authorized to arrest, accuse, or detain individuals for criminal offenses, as this authority is reserved for the national security agencies under the Criminal Code.
The Commission overlooked the fact that offenses that are comparable to those outlined in Section 13 of the Commission of Inquiry Act, Cap 30:01, (where the allegations are made) are to be tried by a Magistrate of the First Class. The Commission is not authorized to issue a warrant of committal to Mile II Central Prisons. The Commission’s actions were conducted without consideration of the Natural Justice Rules, the Constitutional provisions, and the Commission of Inquiry Act Cap 30:01, which established it.
The Commission of Inquiry violated the principles of natural justice by issuing an order of committal against the Appellant without providing him with the opportunity to respond to the allegations levied against him. The Commission of Inquiry transgressed the principles of natural justice and established “When it ordered the Appellant’s committal to Mile Il Central,” he stated.
Mr. Cham contended that the alleged actions ascribed to him occurred ex facie curiae, which means they occurred outside the Commission’s premises. Consequently, a formal hearing was necessary to ascertain their validity.
He asserted that, despite his presence within the Commission of Inquiry’s precincts, he was not summoned to provide testimony.
Mr. Cham also asserted that the Commission’s directive to appear before the Commission on November 14, 2024, to justify his exemption from prosecution and his detention at Mile II Central Prisons were procedurally improper and an abuse of authority.
The Commission did not specify the rationale behind its authority to prosecute the Appellant for the alleged offense. The Commission’s order, which concurrently penalizes the Appellant in connection with the process while establishing a process to be pursued on November 14, 2024, lacks legal justification. He stated that there was no basis or indication that the Appellant would not voluntarily submit to the 2024 show cause date, as ordered by the court on November 14, 2024.
The Commission was accused by the former CEO of KMC of failing to act in good faith or maintain impartiality, as required by the principles of equitable hearing guaranteed under the Constitution. He claimed that the Commission did not afford him the opportunity to be heard prior to issuing orders against him.
He asserted that the Commission exhibited bias and acted in poor faith in its interactions with him.
Mr. Cham also argued that the Commission’s committal order was entirely predicated on the testimony of adverse witnesses, which denied him the opportunity to present his perspective.
“The Commission violated the principles of natural justice and the fundamental rights of a fair hearing by issuing the order without providing the Appellant with the evidence upon which it was based or providing him with an opportunity to respond,” stated Mr. Cham.
