|
Momodou
Denmark
11828 Posts |
 Posted - 05 Aug 2009 : 20:26:07
|
Culled from The Point Online
---------
In the Six Journalists’ Trial, Sam Sarr Addresses The Court
The Point
http://thepoint.gm/africa/gambia/article/in-the-six-journalists-trial-sam-sarr-addresses-the-court
 Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Samuel Osseh Sarr, the Editor of Foroyaa Newspaper who is charged alongside Ebrima Sawaneh, Pap Saine, Sarata Jabbi-Dibba, Pa Modou Faal, and Bai Emil Touray on charges ranging from conspiracy to publish seditious publication, conspiracy to commit criminal defamation and criminal defamation on Monday 3rd August 2009, addressed the court, presided over by Justice Emmanuel Fagbenle of Banjul High Court.
Sam Sarr, the only accused person representing himself told the court that in as far as it affects him; he will associate himself with Defence Counsel Lamin Camara’s address.
In his submission, Sam Sarr submitted that “I have been charged with six counts, two of which related to seditious and three others to defamation and one count relating to conspiracy”.
He said that all the counts talk about publication, and thus suggested that in this regard the issue of Freedom of Expression arises in this trial. He noted that Section 25 subsection-1 paragraph (A) of the Constitution of the Gambia states that every person shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression.
He further adduced that this shall include freedom of the press and media. Sam Sarr submitted that freedom of expression is often referred to as the cornerstone of all human rights, and added that it is further strengthened in Section 207 subsection (1) of the constitution of the Gambia. Noting that there must be free flow of information and ideas which enable people to make informed choice, facilitate and strengthen democracy, he said, freedom and independence of the press are pairs that are guaranteed.
The sixth accused then referred the court to Section 207 subsection (3) and submitted that “press and other information media must uphold the principles, provisions and the objectives of the provision with responsibility and accountability of the government to the people of the Gambia”.
He further submitted that freedom of the press is one of the best means of forming an opinion of ideals to their political leaders and provide the opportunity to reflect on the preoccupation of public opinion.
He submitted that this is the opportunity that is accorded to the President of the Gambia Press Union when she demanded publication, having regarded that “we have published the interview of the President of the Gambia”. The sixth accused said this is bound out in Defence No.6 exhibit (B).
He further submitted that from his evidence, it is clear that he was giving all and sundry the opportunity of free debate, which he said, is the very core of the concept of a democratic society.
Sam Sarr informed the court that it is also in evidence that he was guided by his work as an Editor in a professional manner to publish divergent views and dissenting views, and all other views that are fit for publication.
He further suggested that it is not the role of the publisher or the Editor of a Newspaper to fight with opinion that has been forwarded for publication, and to make the Newspaper accessible to views, especially when it concerns the right to reply.
The sixth accused further submitted that failure to publish exhibit (A) would have amounted to failing in his constitutional responsibility, as stipulated in Section 207 subsection(3) of the Constitution
According to him, it would have amounted to denying the people of their right to know. And then he submitted “it would have been unprofessional because the President of GPU would have been denied the right to reply”.
DW6 added that if a Newspaper comes to a stage where it cannot publish opinion and press releases, it might as well close down.
Sam Sarr rebutted the prosecution submission that it would have been better to write a private letter to the President, making a suggestion which, he said “I consider such proposition out of place”.
He further testified that the Constitution of the Republic of the Gambia advocates for a transparent government and noted that the role of the media is to facilitate such transparency by scrutinising the executive and encouraging debate.
Sam Sarr further referred the court to Section 207 sub Section (3) which, he said, affords citizens to criticise and respond to a public statement made by the President and the government on matters of public interest.
According to him, failure not to abide by the principles enunciated in Section 207 sub (3) of the Constitution will enhance the hands of tyrants and corrupt officers.
DW6 further suggested that count 2, 3, 5 and 6, do not actually have any innuendo. He said there is no direct statement in whatsoever in exhibit A and B, which indicated that the President and the government of the Republic of the Gambia are responsible for the dead of the late Deyda Hydara.
He said the prosecution was quite particular about the word exonerate and thus submitted that if the statement is read it is not indicated anywhere.
He asked “how can one imply from it that the government and the President cannot be exonerated from the killing of the late Deyda Hydara when it is not said so”.
DW3 submitted that Section 191 of the Constitution has put the President in charge of the NIA.
Sam Sarr further adduced that there are also various government security agencies, such as the police that conduct criminal investigation.
He informed the court that Section 88 also empowers the DPP to be responsible for prosecution. He went on to adduced that the evidence form exhibit (A), that is the GPU statement is clear that the President of GPU was concerned with the lack of progress made concerning investigations into the death of the late Deyda Hydara, and thus it was stated in the extract from GPU, which the prosecution presume otherwise.
He testified that the government being responsible for investigating crimes and prosecution was told that they cannot exonerate themselves from their responsibility.
DW6 went on to read some of the paragraphs in Defence No.6 exhibit (C) and also referred the court to exhibit (J) and read a paragraph from exhibit (J), which is said to be written by Ndey Tapha-Sosseh.
DW6 also referred the court to Defence No. 6 exhibit C page 14, which reads “what is still amazing the eye witnesses are still in Senegal”.
He submitted that he had laid evidence that the second accused told the court that she very well knows one of those two ladies, whom she said, has since 2005 been living in the Gambia in Dippa-Kunda.
DW6 submitted that Ndey Tapha Sosseh felt that enough had not been done into investigation of the late Deyda Hydara, and thus “the whole attitude was suspicion”.
He concluded by saying that the meaning given by the prosecution that the government and the President killed Deyda Hydara was wrong.
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
Topic Locked
