The Supreme Court of The Gambia will, effective June 23rd, commence its quarterly sittings to precide over pending criminal and civil cases lodged at the country’s highest court.

According to the official judicial notice from the Supreme Court, the June 23 sitting is in pursuant to the Rule 4 (1) of the Supreme Court Rules of The Gambia.

The court will hear 11 cases, including the an appeal case involving the constitutional case filed by UDP and Momodou K Sanneh, the minority leader and National Assembly member for Kiang West, against the state and the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC).

The complainants, UDP, and Momodou K Sanneh, filed an appeal suit at the Supreme Court, after their petition was struck out by a single judge, Chief Justice Abdou Karim Savage. The Supreme Court, which comprises a five-member panel of judges, later adopted the decision of the Chief Justice which subsequently led to the filing of an appeal suit by the complainants.

The same notice added that an election petition case, filed in by Omar Jallow, alias OJ, will also be heard by the court.

The Supreme Court, presided over by Chief Justice Abdou Kareem Savage, will Monday rule on the preliminary objection raised by the defendants against the constitutional suit before it.

The defendants, the Attorney General and the Independent Electoral Commission  (IEC), raised a preliminary objection to the suit, arguing that the suit was not properly constituted and that it is an abuse of the court process. The defendants further argued that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

The plaintiffs- UDP, NRP and Momodou K. Sanneh- had filed a suit at the Supreme Court contesting the recent amendment of the Local Government Act by the National Assembly, which now gives the President power not only to remove Mayors but also to dissolve elected councils, in addition to overhauling the system of choosing chairmen of councils by doing away with universal suffrage.

In their claim the plaintiffs seek a declaration that the bill entitled the Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia 1997 (Amendment) act, passed by the National Assembly on the 6th day of September 2007, runs contrary to the spirit and intent of section 193 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia and is therefore void and of no effect.

The claim also seeks a declaration that the bill entitled the Local Government (Amendment) Act 2007, passed by the National Assembly on the 31st of October 2007 and assented to by the President on the 19th day of November 2007 was made in excess of the powers conferred on the National Assembly and the President.

They further seek a declaration that the Local Government (Amendment) Act 2007 (Act no 13 of 2007) is null, void and of no effect, in addition to an injunction restraining the 2nd defendant (IEC) from holding or conducting the election for the Municipal and Local Government Authorities scheduled for January 24th 2008 under the Local Government Act as amended and the Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia as amended.

Ruling is set for Monday 14th January 2008.   

The constitutional case filed by the UDP, NRP and Momodou K. Sanneh as plaintiffs, against the Attorney General and the Independent Electoral Commission as defendants, continued Thursday at the Supreme Court.
The case is being presided over by Chief Justice Abdou Kareem Savage.

In her submission the Attorney General and Secretary of State for Justice, Marie Saine-Firdaus, stated that the preliminary objection raised by the 1st defendant is that the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the matter. She added that the suit is not properly constituted and is incompetent.

She adduced that the fact that the suit was filed in the first place was an abuse of the court process.
She added that the court is invited to invoke jurisdiction under section 127 of the Constitution on the purported claim that the plaintiffs seek- whether the National Assembly acted in excess of its powers.

Secy Saine-Firdaus further submitted that the plaintiff was trying to get a result not legally available, noting that it could not be given by the court for the reasons mentioned above. She argued that the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, UDP and NRP, lack capacity to institute the suit as they are legally still members of an existing political party called NADD.

She said only Ousainou Darboe and Hamat Bah resigned individually as members of NADD, inferring that therefore the plaintiffs are pursuing the cause of their interests without the approval of the party body of NADD.

On the 3rd plaintiff, she submitted that he is a member of the National Assembly who voted against the amendment. She explained that after a majority vote at the National Assembly in favour of the bill, the 3rd plaintiff decided that he would seek to overturn this amendment through the legal process. She maintained that he could not do so because his role as a NAM overrides his position. This, in the view of Secy Saine-Firdaus, precluded him from trying to have a second bite of the cake.

Secy Saine told the court that the National Assembly was not a party and the decision may affect them if the suit is granted.

She finally urged the court to dismiss the suit as jurisdiction does not cover it and it is incompetent.

For her part, lawyer Amie Joof-Conteh, counsel for the IEC, submitted that the suit is incomplete because it did not disclose any cause of action against the 2nd defendant, IEC. She said that the matters complained are not matters that the 2nd defendant is party to and as such the plaintiff had no cause of action against the second defendant.

She said it is also incompetent to ask the 2nd defendant to go contrary to the Constitution of the country, adding that the 1997 constitution had mandated the IEC to conduct all national elections in the country. She cited some points of law to back up her submission. She finally urged the court to dismiss the case. The case continues today.