Treason Trial: Defense Lawyer Asks Court To Acquit & Discharge Koita &11 Others

By Feima Sesay

Lead Defense Counsel Including Lawyer Musa Pious, Ady Macauley and others representing Amadu Koita Makolo, Bai Mahmoud Bangura and 10 others have requested the court to acquit and discharge all the accused persons on the grounds that the prosection failed to meet the elements on the Threshold of evidence in relation to offences of Treason, Misprion of treason Murder and other related offences

They made these request before Justice Komba Kamanda presiding judge over the ongoing treason trial during their Oral Submission on their No Case Submission.

Lawyer Sigismund A Conteh, defense counsel for the first accused Amadu Koita Makolo in his oral No case submission said though the first accused was charged with several counts of murder touching and concerning the issues around November 26th 2023, the witness of fact that the prosection brought to proceed with their case most especially Major General Alpha said he saw Sorieba Mansaray approaching towards Cockrill head quarters but no mention was made of the first accused being present at that instance.

He said the testimony of Leutinunant Colonel Sandi who he said was at Cockrill Head Quarter stated that the first accused was in the vehicle but no evidence was led as to his intent or purpose for being in the vehicle and drawing from the testimony of PW 27 staff sergeant Alhaji Koroma was corroborated by the accused in his caution statement that whiles he was at Murray town, he was informed that first accused had been captured, adding that this position was consistent with the statement of the first accused to the police.

Following up on that he said PW 30 Inspector Mohamed Jusu, the cyber expert tendered the phone recovered from the first accused and in doing so did not distinguish whether the photos in the gallery were sent by the accused and the first accused in his statement to the police said he went to Pa Sesay’s place for traditional help and the testimony of PW 27 he said was corroborated, adding that only one photo in the gallery was shown to the first accused .

In closing said the CCTV footage which shows an image of the first accused crossing the street at Pademba Road prison gate, he was confronted with during his statement and stated very clearly that he was under the custody of the assilants.

Lawyer SA Conteh added that there was no link between the accused and those that were murdered, because no weapon or magazine he said was found with the accused whiles he was captured.

He submitted that the prosecutor did not present any evidence linking the accused to the offenses charged in the circumstance asked the learned judge to discharge the accused for lack of evidence.

Lawyer Foday Mansaray in his oral submission on behalf of the second accused Mohamed Jalloh referenced counts 2,4,6,17,18 and 19 that deal with murder said the manner in which the offenses were charged by the prosecution demonstrate that, the second accused Mohamed Jalloh and the first accused were the only one that murdered the individuals on the counts but said had not portrayed it as Joint enterprise.

In respect of count one of the overt Act, he said several individuals according to the allegations conspired to overthrow the country. He furthered that on the issues of joint enterprise if that was what the prosection indebted should not be limited to the first and second accused, adding that what they tried to portray was that the first and second accused went and killed these individuals.

However, he said there was no evidence to fulfill the Overt Act requirements especially so when according to the autopsy the death of the these individuals were caused by billets and said there was no evidence to link the second accused to the said bullets.

The the manner in which the offenses were charged submitted that the second accused being present at national did not suffice for him being charged with murder.

There was no evidence to show that he was caught with weapon that led to the death of theses individuals.

He submitted that the second accused should not answer to any allegation because there was no evidence, adding that in respect of count six shooting with intent and the allegation was that the first and second accused shot Major General Alpha and was brought as witness and when asked whether he knew the second accused he said yes as his former soldiers and not the one that shot him.

In conclusion said the prosection failed woefully to prove the elements on count six, adding that for count six that was the only witness they brought in.

On count 1 and 2, he submitted that section 54(3) of the 1991 constitution does not expressly repeal section 1 sub section 2 of the treason and state offences act.

In the circumstance submitted that the issues of consent was a must.
Lawyer Ady Macauley in his oral submission for the third accused Emmanuel Salifu Kamara submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the essential element on which the accused was charged such as Treason and Misprison of Treason.

On paragraph 29, he said it was very clear that the third accused spoke on the phone with two of the assilants who happened to be his workmates and that he said was a fabrication by the prosecution.

He refered the judge to exhibit DD 1 to 6 and the call log of Sorieba Mansaray which showed that on the 20 to 25 November 2023, he was in Makeni and he never left contrary to the assertion of the prosection that he abandoned his duty post and exhibit showed that Yapoo Sesay was in Makeni.

At Paragraph 30 he said the prosection painted the allegation to show that the 3rd accused was in constant communication with the assilants.
He refered the judge to exhibit AAA 1-15 and BBB 1-16 which showed that the 3rd accused spoke to Sorieba Mansaray at about 8.50 on 25th Noveber 2023 but said that was a fabrication by the prosection to mislead the court.

Exhibit AA 1 to 15 and BBB 1 -14 shows that the 3rd accused spoke to Yapoo Sesay on the 27th November 2023 and not the 26 November as alleged.

He submitted that the elements of misprion of treason there was nothing to show that the crime was committed by the accused and pleaded with the judge to accept his no case submission and not that of the prosection.

In his oral submission on behalf of the fourth accused Alimatu Hassan Bangur Lawyer Emmanuel Teddy Koroma adopted his written submission on the no case.

The fourth accused he said was before the court on one count of misprison of treason, it is an essential element in establishing count 10 that the prosection must prove that the 4th accused had knowledge with respect to the planning and commission of the act which is treason.

The prosecution he said willfully and unlawfully failed to disclose same to the appropriate authority.
He refered the judge to exhibit BB 1 to 14 which was the voluntary caution statement of the accused were it was put to her that she committed the offence of misprion of treason by failing to inform the appropriate authority where she said she failed to do so because she did not confirm whether it was Koita’s numbers.

Lawyer Koroma also referred the judge to the call log adding that it was one sided messages and there was no communication between her and Koita
“Is Hi, Hello an offence?” that question he said the prosecution had failed to answer and submit that paragraph 50 of the reply sent by the prosection has no merit, adding that nothing came up from the cyber annalist in respect of knowledge to the commission of the offences.

In conclusion submitted that the 4th accused was just wasting her time being in court and her liberty he said has been deprived and justice must be served.

Lawyer AA Bangura in his oral submission on behalf of the six accused Hassan Leigh said the accused was charged with two counts of misprion of treason and unauthorized wearing of military uniform.

The offences of misprion of treason, he said, is a common law office and seemed to be unsettle, adding that the 6th accused has no knowledge of the offences, he referred the judge to the case of Lansana and 11 others.

The prosecution, he said, was under obligation to prove that the sixth accused has knowledge of the said treason and failed to confirm with the relevant authority in the circumstance said they failed woefully to prove a case against the accused.

One of the witness said during cross examination did not bother to confirm the allegation that the 6th accused indeed went to his friend Kanu who is a military personnel to inform him.

On count 12 which is unauthorized wearing of military uniform, he said, the 6th accused was never found with any military uniform, adding that an exhibit was tendered in court which showed that the accused was forced to wear a military uniform.

In conclusion said the prosection failed to reach their threshold in proving their case against the accused.

Lawyer Hassan Kamara in his Oral Submission On behalf of the 7th accused Mohamed Woodie said he was before the court on two counts of treason, adding that hence the reply to his No case submission, adding that the 7th accused was arrested together with one Rashid Koroma standing trial at Courtmartial.

He submitted that being arrested with other person does not fall under the overt act and the prosecution, he said, failed in reaching their threshold.

The 7th accused, he said, told the investigators that he went to visit his girlfriend who lived at Murray Town and on the day in question, there was no evidence showing that he was part of the assilants that came.

He said cyber analyst tendered call logs of the 7th accused and only tendered 5 mobile phones and the 7th accused phone, he said, was not among and when asked the reason why he did not tender the 7th accused phone said there was nothing of police interest.

He submitted that a jury properly directed would not convict the accused due to the weak evidence led by the prosecution.

In conclusion said the prosecution failed woefully to adduce any evidence against the accused adding that in respect to conspiracy it was the duty of the prosection to prove same and said they failed to do so, noting that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.

He pleaded with the judge to discharge the accused.
Lawyer Ady Macauley in his oral submission also on behalf of Bai Mahmoud Bangura said the prosection failed to prove the elements in all the 8 counts against the accused.

He refered the judge to Paragraph 66 to 67 of the reply by the prosecution and exhibits U 1 to 17 which is the caution statement of the 8th accused which he clearly stated that he had known the 2nd accused since 2019 as his tenant at will.

In the area of conspiracy, he said not a single item or exhibit had shown that Bai Mahmoud Bangura conspired with anyone and therefore the prosecution had failed to prove that and the caution statement of the second accused corroborated same that he has been staying with the 8th accused a fact he said that has not been contradicted by any witness.

The prosection, he said, failed to prove the elements of Misprison of treason, Harbouring and other related offences and further referred the judge to the case of Lansana and 11 others. He said the court will be left with no alternative but to acquit and discharge the accused.

In respect of the 9th accused said the prosection had failed to prove the elements on which the accused was charged with Misprion of treason and harbouring.

For count 16th in respect of duplicity and uncertainty, he said 9th accused ASP Ibrahim Sesay said from his caution statements that his address was search but nothing of police interest was found and said it was uncertain and bad in law for the Prosecution to assume so.

For duplicity, he said, the 9th accused was charged with harboring Ibrahim Thorley Bangura, adding that the use of the word ‘and’ by the prosection failed to prove the elements and therefore said for duplicity it is bad in law.

He refered the judge to Achbole 26 edition page 22. Exhibit EEE 1 to 9 and exhibit DDD 1 to 6, he said, showed that Sorieba Mansaray and Yapoo Sesay were in Makeni on the 26th November 2023 and did not mean that the accused knew that there was a plan to overthrow the government of Sierra Leone .

In closing said the accused only spoke to the police on the first on December 2023 but the allegation was that he refused to give information on the 26th November 2023 when they only spoke to him on the 1st December 2023.

He said there was no evidence to show that he spoke to the police on the 26th November 2023 and in the circumstance pleaded with the court to discharge the accused noting that the prosection failed to proved the elements on which the accused was charged.

Lawyer Pious Sesay in his Oral submission on behalf of the 10th accused Tamba Yamba said there was no evidence to show the crime was committed by the accused and the only relevant person was the evidence of PW 30 showing that the person on the CCTV footage was the 10th accused.

He drew the attention of the judge to the voluntary caution statement of the 10th accused where he said he was not confronted with the CCTV footage and that he said does not constitute evidence.

He said the medical personnel testified in court but said there is no evidence connecting the accused to those murders and it also came clearly that the accused was given instruction by his boss to go and repeal the assilants. For the offences of treason, the prosection he said had woefully failed to provide evidence on that elements.

He requested the court to strike out the whole proceedings and relied on Lansana and 11 others. He furthered that the Fiat does not contain requirement and fact upon which the offenses were founded.

He said it means that the fiats is bad in law and in the circumstance requested for the proceedings to be stricken out as it has to do with jurisdictional issues.

Lawyer A R Gbla in his submission said the 12th accused Abdul Sorie Hassan Bangura was charged with two counts of treason and murder and the prosecution in that light, said, failed to prove their case.

The elements of proof he said could be substantiated where there is proof, adding that when PW 30 Mohamed Jusu revealed that when the mobile phone of the 12th accused was searched, nothing of police interest was found, adding that the accused was seen passing with one Amadu Koroma which the prosection failed to proved.

The accused, he said in his statement, said he was captured by the assilants and others, adding that in respect to the CCTV footage, the 12th accused weapon was pointed down and was not seen firing or breaking Pademba road prison.

He further submitted that during the said CCTV footage there were no conversation between the accused and others, and the prosecution he said has failed to prove that the 12th accused took part on the November 26th attempted coup.

Lawyer Gbla said no evidence was adduced to show that the 12th accused provided arms and ammunition to free inmates and call on civilians to join them to overthrow the government.

He said the elements of Conspiracy is key when it comes to the elements of proving conspiracy.

He said there was no proof to show that the 12th accused partook in any form of murder and the prosection he said had failed to meet a threshold.
In conclusion submitted that the 12th accused be acquitted and discharged accordingly.

The state prosecutor AJM Bockarie in response to all the Oral Submissions made by defense counsel, submitted that they relied entirely on the evidence adduced before the court and for which he said non of the witnesses were discredited.

Firstly he said for the no case submission for the first accused Amadu Koita Makalo, he relied on the evidence of PW 1,7,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,24,29,30 and 31, adding that the evidence before the court remained uncontroverted that there was a coup plot and the evidence of these witness proved systematic attack on government official on their indictments.

He said there was no denial that Cockrill, Wilberforce and Murray town military facility was attacked, adding that they could not deny that the second accused explained in his caution statements the preparation conduct of the first accused and even went further to explain their endeavour to overthrow the government which the first accused was a key player.

The testimony of the 30th witness he said showed documentary evidence extracted from the mobile phone of the first accused involvement on the November 26th coup.

He further submitted that he relied on exhibit Q1 to 33 and also RRR 1 to 5 which is the CCTV footage showing the first accused giving directions at Pademba road prison, adding that the accused in his statement admitted to the incidents at Murray Town and Congo cross.

In respect of the second accused Mohamed Jalloh said they relied entirely on his confessional statement and the evidence of PW 8,9,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,30 and 31st witness, adding in his statement admitted to having military Regalia.

In respect of the 3rd accused, he relied on their reply to the No Case Submission and further submitted that the evidence that was presented before the court was tested under cross examination and no signs of fabrication he said was disclosed before the court and distanced himself from the statements of Lawyer Macauley that their evidence was fabricated.

He said exhibits BBBBB 1 to 18 and exhibits YYYYY shows that the accused Emmanuel Salifu Kamara had knowledge and was aware of the offences and relied on those exhibits in proving their case against the accused.

In reply to the oral submission in respect of the 4th, he relied on their response found at pages 16 to 18 paragraphs 46 to 55 of their reply and the evidence of PW 10 and 30.
He said on the submission of 6th accused relied on his confesion where he admitted knowledge of the coup and was arrested with full military uniform and relied on the evidence of PW 3,4 and 5 and also exhibit M showing the accused in full military Regalia.

In respect of the 7th accused Mohamed Woodie he relied on their submission made at pages 18 to 20 from paragraphs 16 to 23 and the evidence of PW 24 and 30 and further relied on exhibit LLL1 to 15 and JJJJ 1-5.
In respect of the 8th accused they relied on their submission at pages 20 to 23 running through pagraph 16 to 22 and in support of their case relied on exhibits DD 1 to 35 adding that when lawyer Macauley was making his oral submission for the 9th accused ASP Ibrahim Sesay brought out fresh issues and relied on paragraph 35 to 45 at pages 12 to 16.

The issue of duplicity and uncertainty, he said, raised by the defense under count 16 which was harboring ,he said created only one offence and nothing more.

He said in respect of the 10th accused relied on exhibits UUUUUU 1& 2 which is the Fiat of the AG adding that on the day it was tendered, lawyer Pious Sesay was absent in court and referenced the court to paragraphs 11 to 21 of their responses.

In respect on the 12th accused said they relied on the evidence of PW 30 exhibits X 1 to 16 and exhibits RRR 1 to 5 which is the CCTV footage and the reports there in and the evidence of PW 21.

Lawyer Bockarie in conclusion said the evidence led before the court which had remained unconverted by the defense showed that the prosection had proved a prima facie case against the accused and therefore pleaded with the court to discountenance the submissions made by all the defense counsel and for the accused to be put to their elections.

Justice Komba Kamanda having listened to boths sides adjourned the matter to Wednesday 26th June 2024 for ruling on the Oral No case submissions whiles the accused persons were remanded in prison.