The High Court presided over by Hon. Justice Jaiteh, today convicted and sentenced Saikou Bah to 20 years’ imprisonment for the rape of a five-year-old girl in Sinchu Alhagie.
The accused, Saikou Bah, was charged with a single count of rape, contrary to Section 3(1) and (2)(d) of the Sexual Offences Act, 2013. The particulars of the offence alleged that on or about June 8, 2021, the accused intentionally and under coercive circumstances had unlawful carnal knowledge of the young victim, name withheld.
The prosecution called five witnesses and presented six documentary exhibits. The evidence included:
The Victim’s Testimony (PW2): The victim, an eight-year-old (five at the time of the incident), testified in camera, identifying the accused and stating that he had undressed her and inserted his penis into her vagina on seven occasions, after which he would give her D5.00 coins to buy chewing gum.
Medical Evidence (PW5): Dr Fatou M. Manneh, a Medical Officer, testified that her examination revealed bruises around the introitus (vaginal opening) and a ruptured hymen. She conceded these injuries could be caused by non-sexual trauma but stated they could also result from forceful sexual penetration. The Medical Report was admitted as Exhibit P6.
Mother’s Account (PW1): Sally Jammeh, the victim’s mother, testified that the child said the accused inserted his penis into her vagina. She examined the child and saw what she believed to be sperm. She also maintained that the accused begged her on bended knees for forgiveness, saying he was only “pouring his sperm”.
The accused, Saikou Bah (DW1), denied the allegations. He testified that his neighbour (PW1) confronted him, slapped him, and, with her sons, physically assaulted him, dragging him downstairs before he was taken to the Old Yundum Police Station. His wife, Binta Gaye (DW2), corroborated the assault.
In the defence of the defence Counsel, Ms C. U. Uduma, argued the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, citing PW1’s testimony as hearsay, the lack of corroboration for the victim’s seven-rape claim, and that the medical officer conceded the injuries were not conclusive of rape.
Justice Jaiteh determined that the prosecution had successfully proved both essential elements of the offence. Justice Jaiteh held that the victim’s age of five years constituted a coercive circumstance, as a child of such tender age cannot legally give consent.
Justice Jaiteh further stated that the victim’s testimony of penetration was credible and consistent. The medical evidence, which found a ruptured hymen, was deemed conclusive evidence of sexual penetration, corroborating the victim’s account.
Justice Jaiteh dismissed the defence’s arguments, finding the accused’s and his wife’s testimonies inconsistent, uncorroborated, and lacking credibility. Justice Jaiteh was satisfied that the case of rape against Saikou Bah was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and found him guilty.
In his sentencing remarks, Justice Jaiteh stressed the extreme seriousness and malicious, reckless, and morally reprehensible nature of the offence, especially against a vulnerable child.
While acknowledging that the maximum punishment of life imprisonment would ordinarily be appropriate, Justice Jaiteh considered the earnest plea for mercy by Senior Counsel S. M. Tambadou, who appeared as amicus curiae.
In his discretion under the sentencing guide, Justice Jaiteh sentenced Saikou Bah to twenty (20) years’ imprisonment, commencing from the date of his initial custody.
The Convict was reminded of his right to appeal against both the conviction and the sentence.
