By Janet A. Sesay
Magistrate Mustapha Brima Jah of Pademba Road Court No. 1 in Freetown has rejected a no-case submission filed by the Defence on behalf of Admire Bio Jalloh and her husband, ruling that the Prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to warrant the committal of their case to the High Court for trial.
Admire Bio and her husband, Dausy Jalloh are facing eleven counts charges to include: conspiracy to defraud, obtaining money by false pretences, conspiracy to rob, money laundering, receiving and uttering forged documents, unlawful dealing in minerals and providing false information under various laws.
The charges further include: obtaining money by false pretences, contrary to Section 25 of the relevant laws; money laundering – contrary to the Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism Act; receiving money by means of a false document and uttering a false document, contrary to Section 7 of the Fraudulent Activities Act; selling minerals without legal authority, contrary to the Minerals Act 2023 and providing false information under the Income Tax Act 2007.
The Prosecution told the court that given the nature of the allegations, a preliminary investigation was conducted to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to put the accused persons on trial.
During the proceedings, the Prosecution called three witnesses who were cross-examined by the Defence Counsel, and the Prosecution also tendered documentary and other evidence before the court.
At the close of the Prosecution’s case, the Defence Counsel made a no-case submission, arguing that the evidence presented was insufficient to require the accused persons to enter a defence.
The Prosecution subsequently filed a response opposing the submission.
In his ruling, Magistrate Jah said he had carefully considered the evidence presented by the Prosecution; the submissions of the Defence Counsel, the Prosecution’s response and the legal authorities relied upon by both sides.
The Magistrate referred to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 2024 (Act No. 8 of 2024), including the provision requiring a Magistrate to commit a defendant to stand trial before the High Court where the statements and other evidence produced and tendered by the Prosecution are sufficient to put the Defendant(s) on trial for the offence(s) charged or another indictable offence(s).
He also considered the provision empowering a Magistrate to discharge a Defendant where the evidence is insufficient to justify the prosecution.
Magistrate Jah further considered the applicable practice direction on no-case submissions, which provides that such a submission may properly be made where there is no evidence to establish an essential element of the alleged offence, where the prosecution’s evidence has been discredited during cross-examination, or where the evidence is so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable tribunal could safely convict.
The Magistrate also considered the principle established in Ganiyu vs. The State concerning the test to be applied when determining whether a no-case submission should succeed.
He emphasised that the proceedings before him were not a trial, but a preliminary investigation to determine whether the evidence was sufficient to put the accused on trial.
Having considered the totality of the evidence, Magistrate Jah held that there was a case for the accused persons to answer.
He therefore rejected the Defence’s no-case submission and committed the Defendants-Admire Bio Jalloh and her husband, Dausy Jalloh to stand trial before the High Court.
The Magistrate further held that sufficient evidence had been adduced by the Prosecution to warrant the accused to stand trial, where they would have the opportunity to cross-examine Prosecution Witnesses in accordance with the law.
The allegations against the accused persons remain allegations until determined otherwise by the court.