By: Dawda M. Jallow
A senior police officer on Thursday told the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court that members of the Gambians Against Looted Assets (GALA) refused repeated orders to disperse from the Westfield Monument before they were arrested by officers.
Chief Superintendent Dawda Jallow, Chief of Operations for Kanifing West and the prosecution’s first witness (PW1), testified in the ongoing case involving 14 GALA members who were arrested during activities marking the association’s first anniversary.
Led in evidence by Commissioner N. Jarju, assisted by Inspector C.D. Jallow, the witness said he received information from the Kanifing Regional Command on May 8 that a group of GALA youths had gathered at the Westfield Monument.
Jallow told the court that he immediately proceeded to the scene with a team of officers. Upon arrival, he said he met Omar Saibo Camara and asked about the purpose of the gathering. According to the witness, Camara informed him that the group had assembled to hold a meeting.
The police officer said he then asked whether the group had obtained a permit from the Inspector General of Police. He said Camara responded that they did not require a permit for the meeting.
Jallow further told the court that he informed the group that the meeting could not proceed without the necessary permit and instructed them to disperse. However, he alleged that the group refused to comply and insisted that the meeting would go ahead.
The witness said he later called in officers of the Police Intervention Unit (PIU), led by ASP Landing Bojang. He testified that the PIU officers also asked the group whether they had a security permit and advised them to leave the area or face arrest. According to him, the group again refused to disperse, leading to their arrest.
At the start of proceedings, only nine of the 14 accused persons were present in court. Four others later joined the proceedings, leaving Fallou Gallas Ceesay as the only absentee. Defence counsel L.S. Camara apologised on behalf of the absent accused, telling the court that Ceesay had consistently attended previous sittings.
Following the witness’s testimony, the prosecution applied for an adjournment to allow PW1 to continue his evidence at a later date. The defence raised no objection, and the case was adjourned to September 15 for continuation of hearing.
About the Author
