Femi’s Trial Is Trial of Free & Fair Elections

Hearing on the stay-of-proceedings appeal filed in by lawyer Ousainou Darboe on behalf of his client and party colleague, Mr. Femi Peters has been adjourned to the 16^th of March after Justice Moses Richards of the Special Criminal Court in Banjul on Wednesday 10^th March said he was giving both sides the final chance for moving their application. During Wednesday’s trial Justice Richards expressed his dismay at the determination of the Kanifing Magistrate’s court to continue with its parallel trial on the case despite the fact that the Special Criminal Court has before it a stay of hearing proceeding on the same case. He said that it is normal practice in the jurisdiction that when an application is filed at the superior court the lower court should stop proceedings.

The said application was filed by defence counsel Darboe, on behalf of Femi Peters, campaign manager of the main opposition Untied Democratic Party, UDP. Lawyer Darboe had applied to the high court for a stay of proceedings in the lower court, pending determination of the application before the high court. He and his client had been dissatisfied with the November 23^rd 2009 ruling by the Nigerian-born Magistrate Joseph Ikpala at the Kanifing Magistrates' Court, that the case was of no constitutional bearing and should there not be referred to a higher instant. Darboe, on behalf of his client, argued that Ikpala that Section 127 of the Constitution makes it mandatory for any court to refer to the Supreme Court when an application it is made. He added that Ikpala had erred when he made himself the sole determinant of whether the case should be referred or not and that the said section of the constitution does not vest any such powers to a lower court where the application is made. Darboe further argued that Ihkpala embarked upon an interpretation of the Constitution, a matter reserved for the Supreme Court; and that this was in complete disregard of the provisions of quoted constitutional section. The magistrate overstepped his authority when he ruled that he does not see how the Public Order Act is in conflict with the Constitution, Darboe argued, and failed to grasp the essence the founders of the constitution had meant. In other words Ikpala usurped the interpretative jurisdiction and functions of the Supreme Court. While the essence of Mr. Peter’s application has been publicly known for some time, that of the state is still to be argued out. Prosecution is yet to be seriously represented in any of the proceedings so far and it seems, as Darboe has alleged, somebody wants to runaway from this case.” That someone may want the matter to be this way, left in the hands of the Kanifing Magistrate’s Court presided over by another contractor-Nigerian than transferred into the more fair-minded hands of Justice Moses Richards.      

Femi Peters is standing trial on two counts of control of procession and loudspeaker, contrary to the Public Order Act, laws of The Gambia. The Act makes it mandatory for persons wishing to hold mass rallies and use a public address system to apply for and secure permit from the police. Mr. Peters had applied for his party to hold such a rally in central Serekunda in October last year. It was after the long Muslim moth of Ramadan and events like the arrests and trial of journalists, unchallenged controversial statements made by President Jammeh on state television to which the opposition has little access and amidst criticism of lethargy within the political opposition. But as usual the police authorities routinely ignored the UDP application for permit to hold the rally. Before this Mr. Peters had been quoted in a local Gambian newspaper declaring his party’s readiness to defy unjust laws that stop the opposition from holding rallies in between elections while allowing the ruling party unrestrained rights to hold un-permitted political rallies. This was why the authorities are bent on holding him personally for a trivial misdemeanour that want to present as a major felony.
But the trial is not only of Femi Peters personally but a trial of free and fair elections and the freedoms of assembly and expression. In a way it is our national constitution that is on trial.