Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the High Court
The High Court on Monday rejected a request by state prosecutors to keep three young boys in remand custody after they were acquitted and discharged of murder and conspiracy charges, underscoring what the presiding judge described as the primacy of liberty once an acquittal has been entered.
Justice Ebrima Jaiteh denied the application moments after delivering a judgment that cleared the three defendants — Muhammed Ceesay, Sait Jallow, and Alagie Jadama — of all charges stemming from the death of a man accused of theft.
Prosecutors had alleged that the boys were among four youths who beat the man, who later died from his injuries. During the trial, however, the case against the fourth accused — said to have recorded the incident on video — was discontinued after the State entered a nolle prosequi, formally dropping the charges. The trial proceeded against the remaining three, all of whom were ultimately acquitted.
Despite the verdict, the State immediately applied to have the boys remain in custody, citing its intention to appeal the judgment.
Defense lawyers strongly opposed the move. S.K. Jobe, counsel for the first and second defendants, argued that continued detention after acquittal would violate the presumption of innocence and ignore what he described as fundamental weaknesses in the prosecution’s case — deficiencies that, he said, the court had already resolved in the defendants’ favor.
Another defense lawyer, K. Jallow, emphasized that the boys had already spent five years in custody before being cleared. She accused the State of seeking to normalize post-acquittal detention as a matter of practice, rather than law.
In response, state counsel contended that the time spent in custody was immaterial, arguing that Section 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 2025, preserved the State’s right to appeal, regardless of how long the accused had been detained.
Justice Jaiteh rejected that interpretation. While acknowledging that the law permits the State to give oral notice of appeal, he said it does not confer an automatic right to deprive acquitted persons of their liberty.
“The presumption of innocence fully and strongly favours the accused persons once an acquittal is entered,” Justice Jaiteh said, warning that the State’s position risked turning acquittals into “empty declarations.”
He described the request to keep the boys in remand as punitive, oppressive, and incompatible with basic principles of justice.
The judge refused the application for continued detention but granted bail on what he described as minimal and humane conditions to safeguard procedural fairness should an appeal be filed. Each of the three must provide one Gambian surety, deposit a valid national identity card with the principal registrar, and comply with terms that will automatically lapse after 30 days if the State fails to file a formal petition of appeal.
For now, the ruling clears the way for the boys’ release — a decision that sharply rebukes the State’s attempt to hold them after the court had found them not guilty.
Comments are closed.