The trial proper has commenced in the case of Abdoulaye Thiam versus Asha Fatty. Abdoulaye Thiam, a Senegalese business tycoon, sued Aisha Fatty, a Gambia businesswoman, and the Inspector General of Police for the recovery of monies and properties including vehicles he gave the businesswoman during the pendency of their intimate relationship.
The Counsel of the plaintiff Abdoulaye Thiam called its first witness Amadou Matarr Jallow, a resident of Sukuta and a businessman, who testified as the first plaintiff witness in the case.
During the examination conducted by Counsel Lamin Ceesay for the plaintiff, Jallow confirmed that he is engaged in the business of foreign exchange and money transfer.
When asked if he knew the plaintiff (Abdoulaye Thiam), the witness (Amadou Jallow) responded affirmatively, stating that he knew Abdoulaye Thiam. Additionally, he mentioned that he knows the first defendant, Aisha Fatty, through his contact with Abdoulaye Thiam.
When asked whether he signed a statement, Amadou Jallow admitted to signing a witness statement and, upon inspection, verified that the presented statement was indeed his own. As a result, the lawyer proceeded to admit the statement as evidence before the court.
During cross-examination, conducted by Counsel Lamin S. Camara on behalf of the first defendant (Aisha Fatty), Amadou Jallow (the witness) was questioned about his competence in the English language. He acknowledged having only a limited understanding of English.
Furthermore, Jallow confirmed that he had signed his documents. About his affidavit dated July 3rd, 2022, Counsel L.S Camara inquired whether Jallow had indicated in court that he was unaware of the amount of money transferred to Aisha and was not knowledgeable about it. Amadou Jallow (the witness) affirmed this, stating that he did not know the matter before the court.
When asked about the relationship between Aisha Fatty and Abdoulaye, Amadou Jallow responded that he was unaware of any details regarding their relationship.
Counsel representing the IGP (second defendant) did not have any questions for the witness (Amadou Jallow) during the cross-examination.
At this point, counsel Ceesay informed the court that Abdoulaye Thiam had filed a Notice of Motion with the court seeking orders with the testimony of Mrs. Aji Fama Taal-Gaye in the lawsuit. The motion, filed pursuant to Order XXIII (7) of the High Court (Amendment Rules) 2013, outlines the importance of Mrs. Taal-Gaye’s testimony and her possession of relevant information about the case.
Outlined in an affidavit submitted by Ousman Mbye, Clerk at Solie Law Chambers. Mbye, as the deponent of the affidavit representing the plaintiff, affirms his authority to provide the information. He asserts his familiarity with the case due to his employment and confirms that Lamin A. Ceesay of Counsel and Kebba Sanyang Esq. are the legal representatives for Abdoulaye Thiam.
The affidavit further reveals that Mrs. Aji Fama Taal-Gaye, a legal practitioner and a friend of the first defendant (, has pertinent information regarding the subject matter of the suit. It is alleged that Taal-Gaye purchased some of the gold, which is under dispute, from the first defendant (Isha Fatty) and is believed to still possess it. The affidavit emphasizes the necessity and significance of her testimony in resolving the issues at hand.
It is argued that unless Mrs. Aji Fama Taal-Gaye is summoned to testify, crucial evidence that could aid the court in making a fair ruling will be lost. The affidavit indicates that granting the application to summon Aja Fama will serve the interests of justice.
The affidavit cites a communication from Lawyer Lamin Ceesay confirming that Mrs. Taal-Gaye is being summoned at the plaintiff’s request. Supporting evidence in the form of a summons document, labeled “OM1,” was submitted.
The affidavit stated that Abdoulaye Thiam, the plaintiff, has requested the court to order the summons of Mrs. Aji Fama Taal-Gaye, based on the affidavit by Ousman Mbye. The plaintiff (Abdoulaye Thiam) believes that Aja Fama’s testimony and possession of relevant information concerning the disputed gold will be instrumental in reaching a just resolution in the ongoing lawsuit. The case is adjourned on the 29th of December 2023.
By: Kexx Sanneh
