By: Isatou Sarr
The prosecution at the Banjul Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday applied to withdraw all four charges, including attempted murder, against Abdul Wahab Jobarteh, citing ongoing investigations and the possibility of fresh charges.
The application was made before Principal Magistrate Krubally, with Assistant Commissioner of Police Manga appearing for the Inspector General of Police, while Counsel Adama Sillah represented the accused.
ACP Manga told the court that the State was relying on Sections 78(1), 78(2)(a) and 78(2)(b) of the Criminal Offences Act to withdraw the case, stating that investigations were still ongoing and that new facts had emerged which could affect the direction of the matter.
He argued that withdrawing the charges would help avoid delays and keep the court record clear, adding that the prosecution may consider filing more serious charges depending on the outcome of ongoing investigations.
The prosecution further submitted that under Section 78(4) of the Act, withdrawal of charges does not bar future proceedings, and therefore urged the court to discharge the accused.
However, defence Counsel Adama Sillah opposed the application, describing it as being made in bad faith and accusing the prosecution of forum shopping.
He argued that the attempted murder charge already before the court was among the most serious offences, and questioned the claim that investigations were still ongoing after the accused had already been charged.
Counsel Sillah also raised concerns over what he described as piecemeal prosecution, noting that the accused had faced separate traffic-related charges at the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court shortly after his initial arraignment in Banjul.
He urged the court to consider consolidating all related matters to avoid fragmented proceedings and potential abuse of process.
The defence further argued that granting the withdrawal could expose the accused to re-arrest and prolonged uncertainty, which he said could infringe on constitutional rights.
In reply, ACP Manga maintained that the prosecution was acting within the law and expressed surprise at the defence objection. He said the provisions cited by the defence were not relevant to the application before the court.
After hearing submissions from both sides, Magistrate Krubally reserved ruling on the application.
The matter was adjourned to July 2, 2026, for ruling.