The Appeals court has on Friday14th August 2020 dismissed the bail application by counsel for appellant Alfred Palo Conteh.
After the High Court found the erstwhile Minister of Internal Affairs guilty of firearms related offences, he was sentenced to two years imprisonment, which his counsel called draconian for a first time offender. Counsel launched an appeal at the Court of Appeal and applied for bail on 15th July 2020 in a Notice of Motion dated 14th July 2020 seeking among others that the court grants Conteh bail pending the hearing referencing Section 67(21) of the Court No.31 of 1965, and the application was supported by Conteh’s affidavit.
Among the issues highlighted by counsel for the application, they said they truly relied on the entirety of the affidavit and argued that the two grounds that formed the basis of the appeal are summary offences. They also pointed out the appellant is a first time offender with good grounding and prospect for success, adding the respondent has nothing to lose granting their client bail.
In his response, counsel for the respondent, Joseph A.K Sesay, filed an affidavit in opposition, sworn to on 28th July 2020, which he heavily relied on. Arguing his case, counsel for the respondent submitted that Section 67 (2) of the Court Act gives the court the discretion, which must be exercised judiciously. “The court cannot shut its eye on the fact that the appellant is not a trial applicant as he had been convicted.”
After listening to both counsels for a week, the Court of Appeal presided by Justice Ansumana Ivan Sesay with Justice Bintu Alhadi and Justice Tonia Barnett came out with their ruling.
“It is all of the above that must be taken into account in deciding whether bail pending appeal should be granted. The court has carefully looked into the issues raised and argument for and against and decided that the application ought to be dismissed. The court is not convinced that there are special exceptional circumstances that have been shown to warrant bail being granted. This application is therefore dismissed.”
The judges, however, ordered the court record be prepared and put before the Chief Justice for assignment within seven days from the ruling, and for Palo Conteh to have two hours of daily exercise and allow his fiancée and son to visit him on a weekly basis among others.
Palo Conteh was represented by lawyer Abdulai O. Conteh, Joseph F. Kamara and Ady Macualey among others, while the respondent was represented by Joseph A.K. Sesay and the Director of Public Prosecutions Easmon Ngakui.
By Mohamed J.Bah