Court Admits Police Investigation Report in D5 Million Suit Against IGP and Justice Ministry

The High Court of The Gambia on Friday admitted a police investigation report into evidence in a D5 million civil lawsuit brought by Sambujang Fatty, a former deputy police commissioner, against the Inspector General of Police and the Ministry of Justice (The Gambia).

Delivering her ruling, Justice Sarah Ayee sided with the State, allowing prosecutors to tender a document titled Investigation Report on Unethical Conduct of DPC Sambujang Fatty, which government lawyers say formed the basis of Mr. Fatty’s dismissal from the police force.

The State’s application was moved by J. O. Okete, deputy director of civil litigation, who told the court that the report had been compiled through due process and bore the official seals and signatures of the investigating body. Mr. Okete said the State had filed a motion on Feb. 11, 2026, seeking leave to introduce the report, arguing that it was central to the “justice of the case.”

The motion was supported by an affidavit from Ebrima Bah, an assistant inspector general of police, who said the document had only recently become available because the officer who held custody of it had been overseas on training and returned to duty on Feb. 10.

Mr. Fatty, in an affidavit opposing the application, challenged the very existence of the report, noting that it was being introduced for the first time after nearly two years of proceedings and only after the plaintiff had closed his case.

Through his lawyer, K. Jallow, Mr. Fatty argued that the State’s explanation was implausible and suggested that the report “did not exist at all material times.” He also pointed to what he described as a suspicious sequence of events: Mr. Bah had been unable to testify on Feb. 10, citing ill health, and the report surfaced the following day.

Ms. Jallow urged the court to strike out the State’s motion, contending that the document had never been pleaded in the original defense or raised during pretrial proceedings. Citing provisions of the Evidence Act and court rules, she argued that introducing the report at this stage amounted to bad faith and deprived her client of the right to cross-examine its author.

She further maintained that admitting findings against her client without allowing him to challenge their source violated his constitutional right to a fair hearing.

Mr. Okete countered that the law permits the admission of relevant evidence and reiterated that the delay resulted from the report’s temporary unavailability. He said the document was indispensable because it underpinned Mr. Fatty’s termination.

In her decision, Justice Ayee agreed with the State and ordered the report admitted.

Following the ruling, Mr. Bah took the witness stand for cross-examination. He told the court he oversees administrative matters within the police service, has held his current post since 2018, and has served in the force for 28 years. He also outlined his academic qualifications and professional training abroad, and confirmed that he had joined the police service in the same intake as Mr. Fatty.

The case was adjourned to Tuesday, Feb. 17, for the continuation of Mr. Bah’s cross-examination.