(Photo Credit Kexx Sanneh)
By Landing Ceesay
Lamin S. Camara, the Lawyer representing Bubacarr Keita (Bob Keita), has filed a notice of motion for a stay of execution of Court Order on DNA test.
Bob Keita, is currently facing a single charge of rape after being accused of raping his ex-wife’s younger sister who was said to be a minor at the time and resulted in a pregnancy.
The case has been going on at the High Court of the Gambia for over 2 years now.
In May 2022, the State Prosecutors filed a notice of motion for the High Court to grant an order for a DNA test between Bob Keita (Accused Person) and the child of his alleged victim.
On 7th July 2022, Justice Momodou S.M. Jallow gave an order for the DNA test to be conducted and the blood samples of Bob Keita, the child of his alleged victim and the alleged victim’s boyfriend.
The State Prosecutor, Kimbeng Tah, told the Court that the child was in coma at a private clinic in Dakar, Senegal.
Three days later (10 July 2022) news emerged on social media of the passing of the child on 8 July, 2022.
On 13th July, State Prosecutor Kimbeng Tah, confirmed to the the court, the death of the child.
However, he informed the court that the blood samples of the child were taken before his demise in Dakar.
On the same day, despite, his lawyer questioning the credibility and transparency of the blood samples allegedly taken from the child before his death, Justice Momodou S.M. Jallow ordered for Bob Keita to be transported to the Edward Francis Small Teaching Hospital (EFSTH) for his blood samples to be taken.
It was later reported that his blood samples were taken together with his alleged victim’s boyfriend.
In today’s hearing, Bob Keita’s Lawyer Lamin S. Camara filed a notice of motion for staying the execution of the order of 7th July 2022, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal to the Court of the Appeal of the Gambia.
Lawyer L.S Camara wants the Court to make an order setting aside the ruling of the court of 7th July 2022 for want of compliance by the respondent.
L. S Camara also wants the court to make an order setting aside the ruling of the court on the grounds that, having regard to the intervening circumstances, and that it is practically impossible to comply with the order or in the alternative.
Bob Keita’s Lawyer further wants the court to make an order staying the execution of the order of 7th July 2022, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal to the Court of the Appeal of the Gambia.
“Any further or other order that this court deems fit to make in this circumstance,” L.S Camara told the court.
In response to Lawyer L. S Camara, Senior state counsel Alasana Jobe said they would need time to study the notice of motion by the defence.
Before adjourning the case, Justice M.S.M. Jallow ordered for the blood samples of the alleged victim to be taken for comparison purposes of the DNA ascertainment.
“Where in anybody is subjected to a sample of DNA in blood being drawn from them, any other biological sample given a hair chronicle of the deceased could be used to establish the DNA paternity in this case,” he said.
Justice M.S.M. Jallow said the State requested to draw alternative DNA samples which Bob Keita’s Lawyer Lamin S. Camara objected to, is also permitted and granted for the State authorities to assist the court ascertaining the paternity of the child and collecting any evidence to ascertain the truth of the case.
Justice M.S.M. Jallow then adjourned the case to 21st July 2022, for the Defence to move its notice of motion.
Notice Of Appeal
Bob Keita’s Lawyer Lamin S. Camara is seeking for the Court of Appeal of the Gambia to make an order quashing the ruling of the High Court delivered on the 7th July, 2022 by Justice M.S.M. Jallow.
Lamin S. Camara laid down six grounds arguing why the Court of Appeal should quash Justice M.S.M. Jallow’s decision.
In his appeal to the Court of Appeal of the Gambia, on ground one, L.S Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow failed to analyse the entire evidence of Bob Keita.
On ground two, Lawyer L. S. Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow erred in holding that section 23 of the Constitution provides for an exception on the grounds of morals.
Particulars Of Error
L.S Camara said the court misconstrued the exception contained in Section 23 of the Constitution to apply to individual cases with adverse impact on public morals or morality.
On ground three, L.S Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow failed to analyse Bob Keita’s brief and completely ignored the arguments contained therein.
On ground four, L. S. Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow failed to avert his mind to the fact that the State is an interested party and cannot be trusted with conducting the DNA Examination.
Particulars Of Error
L. S Camara said the ruling failed to encapsulate the principle of fair hearing by not stating that the DNA examination should be supervised by a neutral person.
On ground five, he said the ruling is perverse and unreasonable and not supported by the evidence adduced before the court and having regards to the circumstances of the case.
On ground six, Lawyer Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow erred in adopting the State’s brief of arguments in its entirety as its own.
Particulars Of Error
L.S. Camara said Justice M.S.M. Jallow, failed to give reasons in adopting the state’s brief of arguments; and that he also failed to analyse the respective arguments contained in the respective briefs before the court.
Comments are closed.