By Foday Moriba Conteh
On the 12th May 202 the Court of Appeal presided over by Hon. Justice Michael P.H Mami (JA) gave directions to the Lawyers representing the former Minister of Finance and Economic Development, Dr. Kaifala Marrah and the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to file and serve their written synopsis and appropriate Authorities on both parties and the Registrar within 28 days before the commencement of oral hearings on the matter.
The empanelled Justices comprised Hon. Justice M.P.H. Mami (JA), Hon. Justice Samuel Omodele Taylor (JA) and Hon. Justice Tonia Barnett (JA).
In a similar development, the Court of Appeal presided over by Hon. Justice Michael P.H Mami on the same date withdrew the files relating to the former Deputy Minister of Health and Sanitation, Madam Madina Rahman for ruling after given thirty (30) minutes each to counsel representing the Appellant and the State. They also gave ten minutes to the Appellant’s Lawyer, Ady Macaulay and the Lawyer representing the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Robert B. Kowa, for rebuttals and rejoinders.
The Commissions of Inquiry’s Person of Interest, Madam Madinah Rahman, appealed against the recommendations and findings of the Chairman and Sole Commissioner. Apart from the jurisdictional challenge made by her Lawyer, Ady Macaulay, he also argued that the Sole Commissioner lacks functional competence.
Amongst Lawyer Ady Macaulay’s five grounds of Appeal, he argued that the Appellant doesn’t bear the ultimate responsibility or could not be held accountable for the affairs and finances of the Ministry they headed. He went on to argue that the findings and recommendations relating to the Appellant made by the Hon. Justice Biobelle George-Will is against the weight of the evidence presented at the proceedings.
Lawyer Robert B. Kowa, arguing on behalf of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice stoutly denied and contested all grounds of appeal on the basis that the Chairman and Sole Commissioner has the competence and jurisdiction pursuant to Constitutional Instrument No. 64 of 2018 which gives them the residual power to issue Practice Direction pertinent to the Commission.
He further contended that the Commission has the functional competence by virtue of the instrument of appointment, adding that the fact and evidence before the Commission is concomitant with the findings and recommendations reached.
It could be recalled that the presiding Judge in consultation with the Hon. Justices, Hon. Samuel Omodele Taylor and Hon. Augustine K. Musa initially directed both parties to file and serve their written synopsis and appropriate Authorities. Having complied, time was allotted to them to argue the case before the Court.
Meanwhile, notices will be sent for judgment by the empanelled Justices.
In another matter, Osman Jalloh Esq representing Osman Badara Sesay, also filed several grounds of appeal on behalf of the Appellant. Lawyer R.B. Kowa on behalf of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice had also filed rebuttal.
The Hon. Justices, Hon. M.P.H Mami (JA) Hon Tonia Barnett (JA) and Hon. A.K.Musa (J) unanimously allotted time for each Counsel to argue their synopsis and rebuttals. The matter comes up on Wednesday 26th May, 2021.
