Lawyer Darboe Addresses Court

Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, counsel for the plaintiffs, on Friday responded to the preliminary objection revised by the defendants as the ongoing constitutional amendment tussle continued at the Supreme Court.

The three plaintiffs UDP, NRP and Momodou K. Sanneh are contesting the recent amendment of local government bill passed by the National Assembly which empowers the President to remove elected councillors, dissolve the councils so constituted, in addition to scrapping the system of election of Chairpersons on universal adult suffrage.

In his submission Lawyer Darboe stated that the suit under litigation was not for the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution but rather to establish that the National Assembly acted in excess of its powers. He said section 127 (1) conferred original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court to determine whether or not a law made by the National Assembly was made in excess of its powers as given by the constitution.

Lawyer Darboe further argued that the law giving the President the power to remove councillors and mayors who are duly elected by the people is made in excess of powers conferred on the National Assembly and the President by the constitution.

He said the procedures adopted by the National Assembly were definitively settled by the full bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Jammeh versus Attorney General 1997 to 2001. He said the plaintiffs are not attacking the procedures adopted by the National Assembly, but that rather they are contesting the National Assembly’s exceeding of its powers by effecting such amendments.

He stated that what could be regarded as an abuse of the court process is the preliminary objection raised by the defendants, which he said is aimed at frustrating the main suit.

On the claim that the suit was not properly constituted as the 1st and 2nd are members of NADD, Lawyer Darboe submitted that the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs have not been re-registered and that there is no proof before the court that the two plaintiffs have de-registered, adding that there is no evidence that the two plaintiffs are members of NADD with the resignation of Ousainou Darboe and Hamat Bah. He argued that it was individuals who constitute political parties.

He said it is a well-known fact that UDP sponsored Mr Darboe as its presidential candidate in the September 2006 presidential election and that NADD equally sponsored Mr Sallah as its presidential candidate. He said UDP and NRP are separate entities from NADD, as both parties put up separate candidates in both presidential and National Assembly elections. He said that IEC would not have accepted the nomination of candidates from these two political parties if they were not properly registered political parties.

Hearing continues today.