Dear Editor,
The acquittal and subsequent re-arrest of Ousainou Bojang and his sister Amie Bojang by Justice Ebrima Jaiteh (on 30th March, 2026) has created a significant legal debate in The Gambia
The legal reasoning and jurisprudence behind such manoeuvres often hinge on the tension between the finality of an acquittal and the state’s procedural powers. Below is a legal breakdown based on Gambian laws and judicial practice.
The verdict, acquittal and discharge – Justice Jaiteh’s ruling was a full acquittal, meaning the court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Jurisprudence, Under Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), the principle of Autrefois Acquit (Double Jeopardy) applies. A person acquitted by a court of competent jurisdiction cannot be tried again for the same offense or on the same facts for any other offence.
The findings – The court highlighted a lack of forensic evidence (DNA, ballistics, or fingerprints), inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts (notably the soldiers’ testimony), and the defence’s strong alibi supported by digital call logs.
Legal grounds for re-arrest – Despite the acquittal, the state often employs specific mechanisms to justify a re-arrest. The reasoning typically falls under three categories:
A. The state’s right to appeal (CPC Section 272). The state has the right to appeal an acquittal at the High Court to the Court of Appeal. If the state files a Notice of Appeal alongside a Motion for a Stay of Execution (of the release order), they may argue that the accused persons acquittal was “perverse” or “against the weight of evidence.
While an acquittal usually demands immediate liberty, the state may argue that the 72-hour detention rule under Section 19 of the 1997 Constitution allows them to process the suspects for “newly discovered evidence” or distinct charges that were not part of the initial trial.
Discharge versus acquittal (CPC Section 161) – There is a critical distinction in Gambian law. If a case is withdrawn by the state under Section 161 of the CPC before a final judgment is entered, the court discharges the accused but does not acquit them.
A discharge (without acquittal) allows for immediate re-arrest and the filing of a fresh indictment. But this is not applicable in the case of Ousainou and his sister. So why are they rearrested by state? In the Bojang case, Justice Jaiteh delivered a final judgment of acquittal. Therefore, re-arresting on the same charges is a direct challenge to the principle of Res Judicata.
Fresh charges and “national security” – If the state re-arrests after a full acquittal, they usually cite “fresh information” or “new charges” that they claim were not adjudicated in the previous trial. This sidesteps the Autrefois Acquit plea by claiming the new charges represent a different “transaction” or “set of facts,” even if they stem from the same event at the Sukuta Traffic Lights,
I challenged the re arrest as a violation of Section 19(1) of the Constitution, the right to personal liberty and protection from arbitrary arrest; Section 24 of the Constitution, the right to a fair trial, which includes the finality of judicial decisions.
In the Gambian context, will the state say the release of the Bojang siblings would prejudice the pending appeal or that the suspects pose a security threat while the state seeks to overturn what they deemed a flawed judicial finding. Now, the Gambian people and the family of Ousainou and his sister are waiting for the state to explain why they were rearrested.
By Honourable Yahya Sanyang Esq
NAM Latrikunda, Lawyer
Gala and the endless protests: the hopeless state of opposition politics in The Gambia
Dear Editor,
I’m a democrat and would like to see an orderly and peaceful change of political power in The Gambia. Gambians Against Looted Assets (Gala) is a group of impressionable youths and well meaning but Gala must simply have to appreciate that as long as the Ecomig troops are stationed in the country, the endless protests, attacks against the IEC by the opposition and the rage against corruption in the country will not worry President Barrow.
Gala and the opposition politics in The Gambia must have to be more intelligent, democratic, strategic and promising change and reforms.
Jumping up and down on the streets without any coherent political leadership and political agenda for government and change is not going to change anything!
The real solution to the Barrow Problem is to form a broad-based opposition coalition for the December presidential election.
The Ecomig troops must be withdrawn from The Gambia. The Gambia is an occupied country by the Ecowas Secretariat, Ouattara, Tinubu and France!
The continued presence of the Ecomig troops in The Gambia is to prevent and stop any radical change in the country and the sub-region.
President Barrow is fine and not worried about anything including the joyrider protests as long as the Ecoming troops are stationed in The Gambia.
Gala and its political activism can be summed up as the diabolical state of opposition politics in The Gambia. Opposition politics in The Gambia is not offering any political agenda for change outlined in policy ideas for government.
There’s widespread political discontent in the country. But there’s no palpable political optimism for change in the country either. It’s hopeless
And the presidential election is in December!
If you think that the endless Gala protests, raging against corruption and “they stole the election rhetoric” would unseat President Barrow in December, you are living in a parallel universe!
Yusupha Bojang
Scotland
