Africa-Press – Gambia. The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the Gambia government in the high-profile constitutional challenge brought by former Auditor General Modou Ceesay, clearing the way for the case to proceed.
Mr. Ceesay is suing the Attorney General, the Inspector General of Police, and Cherno Amadou Sowe, alleging that his removal from office earlier this year was unlawful and violated multiple provisions of the 1997 Constitution as well as the National Audit Office Act of 2015. The lawsuit invokes the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
The State had sought to strike out Mr. Ceesay’s reply to its Statement of Case, arguing that the Supreme Court Rules do not expressly permit such a filing and that parts of the reply were irrelevant. The Attorney General and the Inspector General of Police lodged their objection on Nov. 13, and oral arguments were heard nearly two weeks later, on Nov. 25.
Chief Justice Hassan B. Jallow rejected the government’s position, holding that the absence of an explicit rule does not deprive the court of the authority to regulate its own procedures or to issue directions necessary to ensure due process and a fair hearing. Mr. Ceesay’s reply—25 paragraphs filed on Nov. 10 pursuant to an earlier court order—was therefore admissible, he ruled.
Though dismissing the objection, Chief Justice Jallow noted that the reply was “very lengthy and detailed” and granted the State leave to file a rejoinder should it wish to respond.
The court is expected to resume sitting on Dec. 3 to begin hearing the substantive matter, which has drawn considerable public attention for its potential to clarify the limits of executive authority and the constitutional independence of the Auditor General.
Background
Mr. Ceesay filed his suit on Oct. 3, alleging that police officers, acting on the instructions of the Attorney General and the Inspector General of Police, forcibly removed him from the National Audit Office premises. He is seeking declarations that his removal was unconstitutional, null and void, and that it breached sections 158, 159, 160, and 169 of the Constitution, as well as key provisions of the National Audit Office Act.
He further contends that the move was retaliatory, saying he had resisted political pressure, including declining a ministerial appointment and refusing to delay audits of public institutions.
The State, represented by Solicitor General H. Thomasi and a team of government lawyers, disputes his account and maintains that Mr. Ceesay effectively vacated his post when he accepted the ministerial nomination.
The case is being closely watched for its implications on institutional independence and the balance of power between the executive and oversight bodies in The Gambia.
For More News And Analysis About Gambia Follow Africa-Press
