Treason trial : Defense Claim of Falling into Prosecution’s Ambush

By Fatima Kpaka
Lawyer Musa Pious Sesay one of the defense counsel for Bai Mamoud Bangura and the 10th accused person Tamba Yamba has yesterday during the hearing before Justice Komba Kamanda said that they were ambush and embarrassed by the state counsel’s application for an amendment on the indictments at the Treason Trial against Amadu Koita Makolo and 11 Others.
He made this statement after the state prosecutor Lawyer Ahmed James M. Bockarie applied for an amendment on the indictments dated 10th January 2024.
Prior to that, when the matter was mentioned and the charges were about to be read to the accused persons, the state counsel lawyer Ahmed James M. Bockarie made an application for amendment on all the indictments dated 10th January 2024.
His application was made pursuant to section 148 sub section 1&2 of the Criminal Procedure Act No. 32 of 1965, adding that the provisions of sub-section 2 of section 148 requires the endorsement of the amendment set on the face of the indictments.
Lawyer Bockarie added that the amendment they were seeking from the court required insertion of the words “Overt Act”.
He added that the amendment sought did not in any way violate the consent and writing of the said indictments, noting that they had not added any other counts or offenses which had not been ordered by the court.
The indictments he said would not in any way prejudice the accused persons.
Lawyer Africanus Sorie Sesay in reply to the application for an amendment on the indictments said they had not been informed about the request for an amendment.
In the circumstance, he requested for an adjournment so that he could confer with his client, the 8th accused Bai Mamoud Bangura, adding that they had been taken by surprise owing to the large number of the accused persons.
He said that the issues raised by the state prosecutor had been very expansive and of factual nature, noting that it was important that they went back to their clients and discussed the issues.
Lawyer Musa Pious Sesay in reply also adopted the application which had been made by lawyer Africanus Sesay.
He said they had been embarrassed and ambushed by the state.
His application was made pursuant to section 23 of the 1991 constitution sub section 4 paragraph B and C, which he said required for fear trial and adequate time. He said his client had not been privileged to be confronted with the propose amendment on the “Overt Act” and in the circumstance he requested for an adjournment to confer with his clients.
State counsel Bockarie in reply to lawyer Pious Sesay’s application said that the defense’s application was wrong, adding that section 23 sub section 4 paragraph B and C which he relied on does not exist in the 1991 constitution.
He noted that another issue which the defense had raised was that they had not been served with the indictments, and added that by section 148 it is not mandatory that they should have been served with the proposed indictments.
He said that they had all been listening to his application for an amendment and that he had no intention to ambush or embarrassed the defense team.
The emphasized that the accused persons knew from the start the offenses for which they had been charged and that no new charges had been added.
He however prayed to the court for an amendment on the indictments to be granted.
Justice Komba Kamanda in his ruling having listened to the applications made by both sides said ” I have heard the privilege and opportunity of hearing the application made by state counsel AJM Bockarie as regards the application for an amendment on the indictments pursuant to section 148 sub section 1 and 2 of the CPA No 32 of 1965. He submitted that granting an order for an amendment in the instant case should not lead to injustice because the accused persons are all aware of the charges against them as no new charges have been added in the amended indictments. I have also heard the legal arguments and submissions from lawyers Musa Pious Sesay and lawyer Africanus Sesay counsels representing the accused persons that the instant application will lead to an embarrassment and injustice because the accused persons have been served with the indictments already and they should be made aware of the propose amendment before such application can be granted. Having listened to both the prosecution and defense counsels on the instant matter I have averted my mind to section 148 sub section 1 and 2 of the CPA No 32 of 1965 the vehicle through which the instant applications made. I have also considered the application of section 23 of the 1991 constitution Act No: 6 of 1991 and I shall take both into consideration in this instant matter. The perusal of both provisions of the laws are not at variance; they boarder on fear trial, the first issues I shall consider is whether the instant application made by the prosecutor falls within the ambit of the law, and from the reading of section 148 sub section 1 and 2 of the CPA No 32 of 1965, the instant application was made at the right stage and time as it is only after an order has been granted allowing the prosecutor to amend that they can amend any service of the propose indictments without an order from court is illegal. Therefore, the application is properly before the court. Where an order is granted for an amendment to be made it behooves the bench to now make consequential orders in line with section 23 of the 1991 constitution”, he submitted.
The following orders were made by the learned judge. Firstly, that the prosecution is granted leave to amend the indictments in line with the proposed indictments before the court.
Secondly, for the prosecution to file and serve the amended indictments on all the accused persons not later that 1:000 pm on the 2nd of February 2024, and he matter adjourned the matter to the 7th of February 2024 for further hearing.
It could be recalled that the accused persons Amadu Koita Makolo, Mohamed Jalloh, Sergeant 10020 Emmanuel Salifu Kamara, Ramatu Kamanda Conteh, Alimatu Hassan Bangura, Hassan Leigh, Mohamed Woodie, Bai Mamoud Bangura, ASP Ibrahim Sesay, Tamba Yamba, Kabba Kamara and Abdul Sorie Hassan Kamara were brought to court for the offenses of Treason, Mistreason, Haboring and other related offences all contrary to the laws of Sierra Leone.