By Bruce Asemota
Following the submission by Yankuba Touray’s lawyer, Counsel A. Sissoho that his client has immunity under the 1997 Constitution and cannot be held liable or answerable before a court for an act, State Counsel K. Tah yesterday replied that Touray should provide facts to the court that whether the murder of Ousman Koro Ceesay was committed within his official duties because that is what the immunity clause covers.
Counsel Tah further submitted that the immunity provision referred to by defence lawyer Sissoho does not automatically oust the jurisdiction of the High Court to enforce or interpret the constitution.
He argued that the High Court has to inquire into the matter on the basis of facts and the law and he referred to Paragraph 13 subsection 1 of the 2nd Schedule of the 1997 Constitution.
He disclosed that the said paragraph is divided into two sections, the 1st limb he revealed deals with personal jurisdiction and the 2nd limb deals with the subject matter and the act carried out by AFPRC.
He said the records before the court revealed that Yankuba Touray was a member of the AFPRC which fulfils the 1st limb.
Hearing continues today.
