By Feima Sesay
Alpha Sheriff alias APC Sheriff and Abdul Karim Mans have on Tuesday 12 March, 2024 made another appearance before Justice Adrian Fisher of the Freetown High Court for the alleged offences of operating a private security company without licenses.
The matter has been adjourned for ruling based on an application made by their lawyer, Joseph Fitzgerald Kamara, for bail to be granted to the accused and such application was vehemently objected to by the state prosecutor Yusuf Sesay.
Shortly after the matter was mentioned, state prosecutor Yusuf Isaac Sesay sought for an adjournment adding that at the last hearing there was ruling given by the court and the Prosecution would take that line of action given by the court.
Lawyer Sesay furthered that they as prosecution wanted the court to give them the opportunity to proceed with their witnesses in the matter.
Lawyer Joseph Fitzgerald Kamara, defense Counsel for the accused persons in reply said it was with a heavyheart he was renewing his application for bail on behalf of his clients.
He said during the last hearing, the Supreteindent of Correctional Center testified before the court that on the 26 November, 2023 their was a prison break and most of the prisoners escaped but both of the accused persons returned to the police station and surrendered themselves.
He said the Supreteindent in his testimony said the return of both accuseds were voluntary adding that they came back to submit to the jurisdiction of the court and they are still in prison.
He said those who escaped are enjoying their lives but they who voluntarily returned are still undergoing punishment.
Lawyer Kamara furthered that the criteria for bail is not just the seriousness of the offense but the fact that the accused would present themselves for trial in court.
He said in consideration, there is a guarantee that if granting them bail they would be in court for trial.
Lawyer Kamara submitted that operating security company without license is a regulatory offense for which a fine can be imposed on the accused.
He added that the security operation was named Samura and Chericoo and asked if it was now an offense to have names as security.
“It is shameful in that facts,” Lawyer Joseph Fitzgerald Kamara stated, adding that after the matter, if the accuseds are free, nobody would compensate them not even the government.
He furthered
that they have sureties that would sign up for their appearances in court, adding that they have spent nine months in prison which is unfair as the offense charged is a bailable offense.
He said to spend a day behind bars is not easy yet talking about nine months.
Lawyer Kamara furthered that by looking at the merit of the case, the accuseds deserve bail, adding that they were in court on the last adjourned date and the witnesses were not in court and in the latest hearing again, they were not in court and all the witnesses whose names were at the back of the indictment are police officers asking that why they should not be in court.
He said let the accused be put on bail as the trial proceeds.
State Prosecutor Sesay said in paragraph 11 of the affidavit opposing to bail stated that the accuseds would be a flight risk if granted bail.
Lawyer Sesay furthered that paragraph 8 of the affidavit stated both accuseds were re-captured and brought before Justice Brown Mark.
He said the matter would have proceeded long since if the accuseds were not absent in court.
He added that the affidavit had given enough information for the refusal of bail of the accused.
He referred his submission to regulations 2 of the constitutional review of bail which talks about bail condition.
He said for bail to be granted, the nature of offense is important and that would warrant if the accuseds would be in court to continue their trial.
He said the circumstances of the case of unlawful possession of arms and ammunitions and unlawfully operating a private security without license is a security threat and suspicious.
He therefore asked the judge to discountenance the bail application made by defense Counsel.
At this juncture, Lawyer Kamara objected that state prosecutor had loss track, adding that he made bail application only but state prosecutor was driving into the evidence and not addressing the court on the bail application being made.
Lawyer Sesay replied that the court was not a court of emotion but a court of records, adding that in the interest of the public the court should refuse the application of bail pending the hearing and determination of the matter.
He said the state is a defender of the rights of all citizens of the state and therefore not looking at individuals.
Lawyer Fitzgerald again said he wanted to exponge certain aspects of the affidavit, adding that paragraph 8 of the affidavit had no form of recapture adding that recapture is not the same as voluntary submission.
He therefore prayed that
the court expunged that paragraph of the affidavit.
He said in paragraph 20 of the affidavit where the prosecution said if the accused are granted bail they would still go and operate the same security company. He said how can the Prosecution tell that if the accuseds are granted bail they would do such thing.
Lawyer Kamara said that he wanted to know if the Prosecution had ‘juju’ to tell whether forecast.
He ended that the affidavit in opposition was of no use, adding that the Prosecution did not want bail to be granted to the accused.
After both arguments,
Justice Fisher said he would rule on it on the next adjourned date.
The matter was adjourned to the 19 March, 2024 for ruling. It could be recalled that the accuseeds were arrainged before the court on two count of possession of small arms without license and also operating a private security company without license.
The indictment stated tàhat the accuseds operate private security company by the name of Samura and Chericoo without license.