By Janet A. Sesay
An objection made by defence counsel Musa Pious Sesay that the twenty-third (23rd) prosecution witness, Sergeant Mani Atonkoa Saffea, should not testify before the court, which objection was overruled by Justice Komba Kamanda.
Before the justice overruled Sesay’s objection, counsel representing the state, A. Jalloh, made an application before the court that they have filed two additional witnesses of fact to testify before the court.
He made his application pursuant to section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Act no.32 of 1965 as amended. He said the prosecution had served the defence team about the fact of which the witness testified.
Sergeant Mani Atonkoa Saffea was about to take the witness stand to testify when defence counsel Musa Pious Sesay objected that it was an attempt being made by the prosecution at that stage to introduce a witness of fact, adding that this has the tendency to deprive the defence of the opportunity to confront the witness with the facts.
He said procedurally, the circumstances under which this application can be granted is when the witness is seeking to be introduced, or to obtain statements at the police station before charges are proffered against the accused.
Lawyer Sesay furthered that in this case they do not know the fact emanating from the witness and they have to put these facts to their clients for them to be able to cross examine the witness.
He added that the application made by the prosecution violates section 23 of the Constitution in terms of a fair hearing.
He said persons named in the affidavit will be deprived of that fact of the matter, adding that the constitutional provision on a fair hearing should be in position.
He continued that the reason why the defence sought for an objection was because the police by their Judges’ Rule have the right to interview an accused and confront the accused with the facts made by the witnesses.
He therefore objected that the additional prosecution witnesses should not be heard as it violates the fundamental human rights to a fair hearing.
Prosecutor Jalloh in response said that the objection made by defence counsel was baseless and had no grounds. He referred the court to section 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act no.32 of 1965.
Jalloh continued that the notice, dated 2nd April, 2024, was given to the court and defence team. He added that the notice contained the summary of what the witness intended to say in court. He said the defence can seek for an adjournment to go through the notice but what the witness was going to say in court is the summary of the affidavit. He prayed that the objection made by defence counsel be dismissed.
After hearing both arguments, Justice Komba Kamanda overruled the objection made by defence counsel Musa Pious Sesay.
The witness took the witness stand, took his oath and testified before the court.