By Dawda Jallow
The Gambia Court of Appeal has reserved its ruling on a motion filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP) seeking to strike out an appeal lodged by Yankuba Darboe for want of diligent prosecution.
The motion, dated 4 May 2026, was argued before a panel of justices after both the appellant and respondent adopted their written briefs of argument.
The case is styled Yankuba Darboe (Appellant/Respondent) versus the Inspector General of Police (Respondent/Applicant).
Moving the application, counsel for the IGP, Counsel Wakawa, adopted the State’s brief filed on 26 May 2026 and urged the court to dismiss the appeal.
He argued that the appeal had been overtaken by events and that the appellant failed to prosecute it with diligence.
“The appeal, as it is our contention, has been overtaken. The supposed affidavit letters attached would not have made it to the appeal. On that, we argue the court to hold that the appellant must be diligent,” Counsel Wakawa submitted.
The State argued that the appeal had been pending for an inordinate period, that the delay was attributable to the appellant, and that the Inspector General of Police had suffered or was likely to suffer prejudice. It further submitted that allowing the appeal to proceed would not serve the interests of justice.
A key issue raised by the State was the alleged failure by the appellant to ensure the timely transmission of the record of proceedings from the Magistrate’s Court, which it said amounted to abandonment of the appeal.
The State relied on the decision in Babou Cisse v. Eli Osaka (2002–2008) 2 GLR 538 in support of its argument that appellants must initiate the compilation of records immediately upon filing a notice of appeal.
Opposing the motion, Counsel Kaddijatou Jallow of Dandimayo Chambers, representing Yankuba Darboe, urged the court to dismiss the application.
She argued that the proper remedy for any procedural lapse was not dismissal of the appeal but directions to regularise any defects, citing Rule 16(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Counsel Jallow also relied on comparative case law, including decisions of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, to argue that litigants should not be penalised for administrative failures of court registries.
She maintained that the delay in the transmission of the record was caused by the court registry and not the appellant.
In his written submissions, Counsel Jallow said Darboe filed his notice of appeal on 25 July 2023 and followed up with multiple requests to the Registrar, including letters dated 11 March 2024 and 4 April 2024, seeking transmission of the record.
According to the defence, the appellant could not be said to have abandoned his appeal, as he had taken active steps to pursue it.
The defence further relied on constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right of appeal and argued that such a right cannot be extinguished due to administrative lapses beyond the control of a litigant.
At the conclusion of arguments, the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Sallah-Wadda, confirmed that the court had taken all briefs into consideration and reserved ruling for 7 July 2026.
The decision will determine whether Darboe’s substantive appeal proceeds or is struck out.
The underlying matter stems from sedition charges before the Magistrate’s Court, linked to alleged remarks made by Darboe at Police Headquarters in Banjul during his detention in connection with the 3-Year Jotna protest.
The prosecution has closed its case, while the defence has yet to open its case pending the outcome of the appeal process.
About the Author
