The Attorney General's Chambers has filed in a one-count criminal charge of drug trafficking and dealing in a prohibited drug against 12 foreign nationals accused of  cocaine trafficking; Memunatu Sesay, Fernando Varela, Barset Godwin, Ephraim Michael Chidubem, Dennis Wilgo Winter, and Juan Carlos Sanchez, Eric Bottini, Juan Carlos Diaz, Louis Dose Fermin, George Sanchez, Rudy Rasoehamid Gazi, and Esteaban Zavala, who are currently facing criminal charges of conspiracy to drug trafficking before Magistrate Hilary Abeke of the Banjul Magistrates’ Court.

The state counsel, Nabou Jones, who announced her representation for the state, during last Wednesday, July 21st 2010 sitting, informed the court about the fresh charge filed in against the accused persons, and applied for them to take their plea to the new charge. "Your worship, the state has filed in a fresh charge sheet on the 14th of July 2010. The state is to substitute it with the earlier charge filed in by the NDEA. However, the state hopes to file in further charges against the accused upon completion of the pending investigations into the case.

The AG Chambers had already sent a letter to the NDEA to that end. Whenever the investigations are completed, the state will amend this charge sheet dated 14th July 2010. Your worship, I wish to apply for the accused to take their plea to the present charge," the state counsel stated. However, her application was strongly objected to by the defence team comprising of E.E Chimeh and Lamin Camara.

As indicated in the fresh charge sheet, Chimeh is representing the fifth, sixth, seventh and eleventh accused persons, while Lamin Camara announced his representation for the first, second, third, fourth, eighth, ninth, tenth and twelfth accused persons. Defence counsel E.E Chimeh based his objection on the premise that the state counsel did not at any time inform the defence about their intention to file additional charge, and as such his clients cannot take their plea to the new charge.

He said: "Your worship the submission made by the state counsel, shows that investigations are still ongoing into the case. Initial plea was done and more pleas are likely to be done. The court should be assured of progress in the case, there is a need for the trial to start." Defence counsel Lamin Camara, also expressed his objection to the application of the state counsel, on the ground that it is up to the court to ask the accused persons to take plea to the new charge instead of the state counsel.

"My lord, I am objecting to taking of plea on criminal case number 82/2010, because legally speaking it's for the court to ask the accused to take a plea to the charge, not the state counsel. My position is that, the accused persons have been asked twice to take plea to charges as indicated in the criminal case number 65/2010 and 82/2010, in which all the accused were charged with the same offence. If there were to be substitution of charges, the first charge should be called and application for its substitution be made, but such was not done in line with provisions of Section 68 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).

Anything contrary to that will amount to double jeopardy, which means punishing the accused twice on the same offence, which runs contrary to the principles of the rule of law. My second point is that, criminal trials should be open, that's the state had filed in new charges since the 14th of July 2010 and we (the defence) only got a copy about five minutes ago right here in court. This act of the state counsel is contrary to Section 26 (3) of the CPC with regards to giving adequate time and facilities for preparation of defence to the accused or their counsel," Lamin Camara told the court.

Responding to the submissions of the defence counsel, the state counsel, Nabou Jones said her submission was misconstrued by the defence team. She said the defence were trying to bite with two hands, that is, they are with one hand objecting to her submission and with the other hand, conceded to her submission for the accused to take their plea. This comment made the defence team to object strongly, urging her to withdraw her comment that the defence are biting with two hands.

The defence team made their position known to the court that, they are objecting for the accused persons to take their pleas to the new charge. The presiding Magistrate later ruled on the issue and overruled the submissions of the defence team. The Magistrate urged the accused take their pleas, but the case was later adjourned to the 4th of August 2010 for plea taking.