Former Lands Minister, Six Others Granted Bail in D13.1 Million Kassa Kunda Land Fraud Case

The High Court has granted bail to former Lands Minister Sheriff Abba Sanyang and six co-accused following their arraignment on multiple charges related to an alleged D13.1 million land fraud involving property in Kassa Kunda previously forfeited by former president Yahya A. J. J. Jammeh.

Presiding over the matter, Justice Jaiteh admitted all seven accused persons to bail after they pleaded not guilty to a nine-count indictment that includes abuse of office, giving false information to a public officer, criminal trespass, and obtaining goods by false pretence.

When the case was called, State Counsel S.L. Jobarteh and M. Sarr appeared for the prosecution. The first accused, Sanyang, was represented by Counsel K. Sanyang, while Counsel Lamin J. Darbo and F. Bondi represented the second to seventh accused persons.

According to the prosecution, the charges arise from transactions involving land in Kassa Kunda that had been forfeited by the state following the findings of the Janneh Commission into the assets of Jammeh.

Prosecutors allege that in 2022, while serving as Minister of Lands, Sanyang abused his office by arbitrarily approving the retention of 40 percent of the disputed land for individuals described as customary owners. He is also accused of providing false information to a public officer by presenting the approval as lawful.

The remaining accused—Cherno Serending Sabally, Kalilu Sanyang, Bakary Gomez, Bakary Sanneh, Lamin Sabally, and Malang Jarju—are charged with criminal trespass and obtaining goods by false pretence. The state alleges that they fraudulently sold portions of the land to various companies and received payments totalling D13.1 million across three transactions amounting to D12 million, D800,000, and D300,000, respectively.

Following the pleas of not guilty, State Counsel Jobarteh applied for the accused persons to be remanded in custody and requested an adjournment to allow the prosecution time to prepare its witnesses.

Defence Counsel K. Sanyang opposed the application, arguing that the offences were bailable and noting that his client had voluntarily presented himself before the court after learning of the charges through media reports.

Counsel Lamin J. Darbo, representing the remaining accused, further argued that the charges constitute misdemeanours punishable by sentences ranging from one to three years. He urged the court to consider the nature of the punishment rather than the monetary amounts involved, citing Section 19 of the Gambian Constitution, which guarantees the right to personal liberty.

During the proceedings, the prosecution and defence also debated whether the recently enacted Criminal Offences Act 2025 should apply. The defence argued that the alleged offences occurred in 2022 and should therefore be governed by the repealed Criminal Code.

The court agreed with the defence position, ruling that the earlier law remains applicable because criminal statutes do not operate retrospectively.

Counsel Darbo also urged the court not to impose the full D13.1 million as an individual bail bond on each accused person, describing such an approach as “manifestly disproportionate,” and requested that the amount instead be apportioned among the co-accused.

In his ruling, Justice Jaiteh reaffirmed the legal principle that bail is the rule rather than the exception in non-capital offences.

“The court finds no legal reason to deny the accused persons their constitutional right to bail,” the judge said.

The court granted bail to Sanyang in the sum of D1 million, while the second to seventh accused were each granted bail in the sum of D2.2 million, representing apportioned amounts of the alleged D13.1 million involved in the case.

Each accused person is required to provide one Gambian surety who owns landed property within The Gambia equivalent to the bail amount. The property must be valued by a certified government or estate valuer and approved by the Registrar of the High Court.

The court further allowed the accused persons to remain on existing police bail until Thursday, March 12, 2026, to enable them to meet the bail conditions. Failure to do so will result in their remand in custody.

The matter has been adjourned to April 20, 21, and 27, 2026, for the commencement of trial.