Recent events in The Gambia have once again brought into sharp focus a principle that sits at the very heart of any just society: due process and the presumption of innocence. The trial of Ousainou and Amie Bojang exposed serious concerns about investigative conduct and the premature dissemination of information through the media. One would have expected that such a high-profile and ultimately embarrassing episode would serve as a turning point, a lesson in restraint, professionalism, and respect for the rule of law.
Yet, the more recent case involving Kexx Sanneh suggests that those lessons may not have been fully absorbed. Following allegations of sexual misconduct made by a minor, Sanneh was swiftly named and arrested, with details circulating publicly almost immediately. While the gravity of such allegations cannot and should not be minimised, the manner in which they are handled is equally important. Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done. And that includes safeguarding the rights of the accused.
The presumption of innocence is not a technicality or a legal loophole; it is a safeguard against injustice. It ensures that individuals are not condemned in the court of public opinion before a court of law has had the opportunity to examine the evidence. When authorities or the media act in ways that suggest guilt before trial, they risk undermining the very foundations of justice. Reputations can be irreparably damaged, and public trust in institutions can erode.
The role of the media is particularly crucial in this regard. While informing the public is a fundamental responsibility, it must be balanced with accuracy, caution, and fairness. Sensationalism or the rush to break news should never come at the expense of truth and due process. The experience from the Bojang trial demonstrated how misinformation or premature conclusions can distort public perception and complicate legal proceedings.
Equally, law enforcement agencies must exercise discipline in their communications. Investigations should be thorough, evidence-based, and free from external pressures. Public statements should be measured, avoiding any implication of guilt until such a determination is made by a competent court.
Ultimately, a society’s commitment to justice is tested not when it is convenient, but when emotions run high and public pressure mounts. Upholding due process and the presumption of innocence is not about shielding wrongdoing; it is about ensuring that justice is fair, credible, and enduring. The lessons from recent events must not be ignored. Instead, they should serve as a catalyst for reform and a renewed commitment to the principles that protect us all.
