By Lamin Cham
The TRRC Amnesty Committee has “approved” amnesty from prosecution for former AFPRC vice chairman Sana Sabally who admitted responsibility for the killing of many soldiers accused of a coup plot in 1994.
The committee’s report which was submitted to Justice minister Dawda Jallow on Wednesday, also “approved” amnesty for Major Bubacarr Bah and Zakaria Darboe. Former soldier Alagie Kanyi was referred to the Ministry of Justice for “finalisation of immunity”.
Meanwhile, the country’s former vice president, Dr Isatou Niie-Saidy has been denied amnesty from prosecution along with seven others.
They are among people adversely mentioned by the TRRC who applied for amnesty to the Amnesty Committee following the submission of the TRRC Report, which recommended the prosecution of specified categories of people found responsible for grave crimes.
According to the official report seen by The Standard, the Amnesty Committee received about 25 applications following its call for applications from adversely mentioned persons. “All these applications were reviewed to determine whether or not they met the conditions for granting of amnesty,” the report stated.
According to the report, the application of about a dozen people were dismissed either because they did not need to apply for amnesty because they were not recommended for prosecution, or were only banned from holding public office among other reasons.
These include Pa Alieu Gomez, Wassa Camara, Basiru Sey, Omar Cham, Ebrima Drammeh, Lamin BO Badjie, Baboucarr Sowe, Tijan Bah, DSP Lamin Cham, Yusupha Sanneh, Amadou Bojang, Baboucarr Mboob and Harry Sambou.
The report also disclosed that the following people who were recommended for prosecution have had their applications for amnesty denied: Dr Isatou Njie-Saidy, Edward Singhatey, Peter Singhatey, Lt Malick Jatta, Omar A Jallow, Baboucarr Njie, John Charles B Mendy and Pa Ousman Sanneh.
The report gave the following explanation of the reasons behind the decisions for each category:
Dismissed applications
The dismissed applications were based on the following reasons:
(i) The applicant(s) were recommended for banning/from holding public office and not to be prosecuted.
(ii) The letter sent was a rebuttal of witness testimony and not an application for amnesty.
(iii) The committee determined that the applicant should not have been listed as a perpetrator as it was a case of mistaken identity.
Denied applications
The applications that were denied amnesty were based on the following reasons:
(i) The applicant(s) did not give a full disclosure in their statement submitted to the commission; did not give a full disclosure in their testimony during the public hearing or did not give a full disclosure in their application for amnesty.
(ii) The applicant(s) were not truthful in their statement submitted to the commission; were not truthful in their testimony during the public hearing or were not truthful in their application for amnesty.
(iii) The applicant(s) did not show remorse in their statement submitted to the commission; did not show remorse during their testimony in the public hearing or did not show remorse in their application for amnesty.
(iv) The applicant(s) did not sign/endorse their amnesty application. Notwithstanding, a determination was made on the merits of the applications.
(v) Their acts or conduct form parts of crimes against humanity.
(vi) The applicant(s) is one of those who bear the greatest responsibility.
Granted applications
The applicants granted amnesty were based on the following reasons:
(i) The applicant(s) gave a full disclosure in their statement submitted to the commission; gave a full disclosure during their testimony during the public hearing or gave a full disclosure in their application for amnesty.
