By Mariama Marong
The Bundung High Court has declared the continued detention of a robbery-with-violence suspect for more than one year without trial unconstitutional and granted him bail subject to a number of conditions.
Justice Isatou Janneh made the ruling following an Originating Summons dated and filed on June 11, 2026, by Omar Jallow, who challenged his continued detention and sought an order for his unconditional release.
Alternatively, Jallow asked the court to release him on recognizance, with or without sureties, on condition that he would appear before any court where charges might be preferred against him.
According to his affidavit, Jallow was arrested following allegations of robbery with violence. He was initially detained at Brusubi Police Station before being brought before the Magistrates’ Court and remanded at Mile II Central Prison.
Jallow told the court that since his remand, he had not been brought before any court for the hearing of his case.
The remand warrant produced before the court showed that he had been remanded on the robbery-with-violence charge until December 30, 2025.
However, the court noted that there was no evidence before it showing that the warrant had subsequently been renewed or extended.
Jallow further told the court that he had remained in custody for more than one year without trial and that the prolonged detention had adversely affected his health, particularly his eyesight, as he was no longer able to receive his regular medical treatment.
He also informed the court that he had suitable sureties who could guarantee his attendance if granted bail.
The State, represented by Counsel W.M.K. Drammeh, with A.A. Cham, acknowledged the delay but opposed the application through oral submissions.
The State did not file an affidavit in opposition to Jallow’s application.
Counsel Drammeh acknowledged Jallow’s constitutional rights but argued that those rights had to be balanced against the public interest, particularly given the seriousness of the robbery-with-violence charge.
Counsel explained that the delay had occurred because the Attorney General’s Chambers had been unable to file an indictment and because the matter had not yet been mentioned before the High Court following its transfer from the Magistrates’ Court.
The prosecution, therefore, asked the court for additional time to file the indictment and regularise the proceedings.
Counsel further urged the court that, should bail be granted, it should be subject to stringent conditions.
In considering the application, the court identified the central issue as whether Jallow’s detention for more than one year and two months without trial violated his constitutional rights and, if so, what remedy was appropriate.
Justice Janneh emphasised that the right to personal liberty is one of the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.
The court referred to Section 19, which protects personal liberty except in circumstances authorised by law, and Section 24, which guarantees an accused person a fair hearing within a reasonable time before an independent and impartial court.
The judge stressed that while the Constitution permits the lawful arrest and detention of persons reasonably suspected of committing criminal offences, it does not permit indefinite pre-trial detention without meaningful judicial oversight or progress towards trial.
The court also noted that Jallow’s evidence concerning his prolonged detention had not been challenged by the State.
It held that where affidavit evidence is unchallenged, uncontroverted and not inherently incredible, the court is generally entitled to accept it as representing the true state of affairs.
The court therefore accepted Jallow’s evidence that he had remained in custody for more than one year without trial.
Of particular significance, the court found, was the remand warrant authorising his detention only until December 30, 2025.
“No material” had been presented to show that the warrant was subsequently renewed or that any further lawful remand orders had been made.
Justice Janneh said the prosecution’s administrative difficulties could not, on their own, justify prolonged detention.
The court stressed that constitutional rights cannot depend solely on the pace of administrative processes within the State.
Despite finding a constitutional violation, the court declined to order Jallow’s unconditional release.
The court recognised that he is facing a serious allegation of robbery with violence, which carries severe punishment.
It held that the seriousness of the charge was a relevant consideration in determining whether bail should be granted and weighed against Jallow’s request for unconditional release.
The court explained that proceedings to enforce fundamental rights are intended to vindicate constitutional rights and are not meant to determine an accused person’s guilt or innocence or terminate criminal proceedings that remain pending.
The court therefore sought to balance Jallow’s constitutional right to liberty with the interests of the State, the alleged victim and the wider public.
The court ultimately ruled that the appropriate remedy was to admit Jallow to bail under conditions designed to ensure his attendance whenever required.
Jallow was granted bail on the following conditions: He must enter into a recognizance of D500,000, He must provide a Gambian surety in the same amount, who must swear an affidavit of means to the satisfaction of the Principal Registrar, The surety must deposit a valid national identity card or passport with the Principal Registrar of the High Court, Jallow must report to the nearest police station to his residence once every two weeks, until otherwise ordered by the court, He must attend court whenever required and He must not leave The Gambia without the permission of the court.
The court also granted the State 30 days to file an indictment and regularise the proceedings. Pending the expiration of that period, Jallow is to remain in custody. However, should the State fail to file the indictment and regularise the proceedings within the stipulated 30 days, Jallow is to be released forthwith unless his continued detention is otherwise authorised by a valid order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
The court further ordered that once Jallow complies with all the bail conditions, he should be released immediately unless he is otherwise lawfully detained.
You need to login to view and post FB Comments!
