Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the Banjul High Court has found Henry Gomez not guilty of seven criminal charges, citing the prosecution’s inability to provide witnesses.
Mr. Gomez was charged with conspiracy to commit a felony, robbery, assault, and making threats of violence, all in breach of multiple sections of the Criminal Code. The purported violations occurred on October 12, 2023.
On March 12, 2024, Mr. Gomez appeared in court and entered a plea of not guilty to all charges against him. On March 26, 2024, the prosecution commenced its case, presenting its initial witness, Police Officer Lamin Manneh. Nonetheless, the following proceedings faced numerous delays as the prosecution pointed to challenges in obtaining further witnesses, asserting that their contact details were outdated.
In light of several adjournments issued by the court, the prosecution has yet to present any formal evidence demonstrating attempts to track down the witnesses. The defence raised concerns about additional delays, contending that the extended proceedings infringed upon Mr. Gomez’s constitutional entitlement to a fair and prompt trial as stipulated in Section 24 of the 1997 Constitution of The Gambia.
Justice Jaiteh aligned with the defence, highlighting the necessity for careful and reasoned application of judicial discretion when it comes to granting adjournments, insisting that such decisions should rest on strong, substantiated grounds. The prosecution, he pointed out, had not succeeded in meeting this standard.
In rendering his decision, Justice Jaiteh emphasised that the sole piece of evidence submitted was Mr. Gomez’s cautionary statement (Exhibit P1), where he refuted the allegations and offered an alibi. The court concluded that this evidence was inadequate to establish a preliminary case against him.
“The prosecution’s ongoing inability to present witnesses, along with their absence of credible evidence to back their claims, reflects a concerning negligence and a blatant disregard for the accused’s essential right to a prompt trial.” “The court is directed by High Court Practice Direction 6(1) of 2013, which underscores the importance of effective case management and the prevention of unwarranted delays,” Justice Jaiteh remarked.
The court, prioritising fairness, rejected the prosecution’s plea for a delay, concluding that the justifications offered were not adequately persuasive. As a result, the prosecution’s case was concluded because it did not provide sufficient evidence.
The court determined that there was insufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court delivered its verdict, siding with the defence, clearing Gomez of all seven charges, and mandating his immediate release.
Moreover, the court firmly urged a reassessment of prosecutorial methods to avert comparable deficiencies going forward, highlighting the importance of safeguarding the rights of the accused and guaranteeing that cases are managed with thoroughness and promptness.
