By Fatima Kpaka
The First accused person RSLAF/18171601 Staff Sergeant Alhaji Koroma has on Wednesday 10th January 2024, during the court-martial trial presided over by Judge advocate Mark Ngegba pleaded guilty on seven counts charges of Mutiny, Committing a Civil Offence and others offences and pleaded not guilty to the remaining 79 counts charges.
After the accused had pleaded guilty, he also asked the court to temper justice with mercy ‘saying that what he did was not intentional as he was influenced by some people.’
The 26 other accused Military Officers who had been arraigned alongside the first accused before the court presided over by Judge Advocate, Marke Ngegba and Seven Court Members all pleaded not guilty to the eight-eight (88) count charges.
The accused persons are before the court to answer to 88 count charges including Mutiny, Aiding the Enemy, Failure to Suppress a Mutiny, Committing a Civilian Offence and Stealing of Public or Service Property among others in respect of their alleged involvement in the failed Coup attempt of November 26, 2023.
Prior to the guilty plea of the first accused, the state prosecutor, Joseph A.K. Sesay had applied for an amendment on the Rank of the 3rd , 4th , 17th , 18th , 19th , 25th , and 27th accused person which were all erroneous deleted while preparing count two, and count three.
Representing the 17th accused, Lawyer Julian Cole raised an objection, for the court not to grant the application citing Section 89 of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Sierra Leone Act 1961 as amended.
He submitted that adding the name to the 17 accused persons is enough to bring a fresh charge against his client, saying that it was unfair to him in respect to which he could not have had an opportunity to deal with during the investigation.
He submitted that the Prosecution could not find favor in the rules of the mansion, noting that the prosecution would have created grave injustices to the 17th accused persons if the application was to be granted.
Responding to the objections by the defense, lawyer J. A. K. Sesay for the State, said the defense has not cited any law to prevent the prosecution from adding charges to the accused person.
He submitted that the court could grant the amendment anytime in a trial pursuant to rule 83 of the Court Martial Act of 2004. He added that the prosecution was not seeking to add a fresh charge against the accused person, but that all the charges against the accused persons had been investigated and put before all the accused persons. He submitted that what the defense was saying is untrue and it was a clinical mistake when the names of the accused persons in question had been omitted.
Ruling on the objection by the state prosecutor, Judge Advocate, Marke Ngegba, ruled that Section 23 (1) of the 1991 constitution cited by the defense was to ensure that the person charged with an offence is not before a competent court of law to answer to charges against him.
He therefore ruled that the defense’ objection could not hold for the simple reason that the amendment sought did not in any way in his opinion create injustice to the accused person. The defense Counsel’s objection was overruled while the prosecution’s application was granted.
The matter has been adjourned to Friday, 12th January, 2024
