On Monday, 29 June, 2020 the first accused and the prosecution in the ongoing treason trial between the State, Retired Major Alfred Palo Conteh and two others have submitted their addresses to the jurors as the matter moves to its conclusion. While submitting his address to the Jurors, Dr. Abdulai O. Conteh, Lead counsel for the first accused informed the jurors that they sit in the jury box as silent observers in the case, but play a key role in the matter – “you are the deciders. You decide not on guess work but based on evidence before the court.”
Lawyer Conteh told the jurors that the entire case of the prosecution rests on a brown bag that contains a pistol that was taken to State House, and his client has nothing to prove but the onus rests on the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubts that his client is guilty as charged. He furthered that his client was not at State House for what he described as ‘bizzy body’ but was invited by President Julius Maada Bio for a meeting in which he never had the said meeting with the president alone, but the prosecution is now saying the accused person having a brown bag that contains a pistol at State House amounts to treason.
He said the prosecution put in their indictment in a quotation that the first accused took a weapon to State House ‘to wit to assassinate the President,’ which he said means the prosecution is not speaking for themselves, and count three in the indictment was never committed to the high court by the judge, – “I don’t know how the prosecution were able to bring it back.” Lawyer Conteh told the Jurors that the accused was not caught with a knife or a Gluck 17 pistol closer to the president, and that having a gun at State House dose not amount to treason
He added that in the history of treason in Sierra Leone no single person has been charged alone for treason but in the case of his client such has been done without giving any evidence that there was a group waiting on the wings to benefit from the treason because the first accused would not have succeeded in doing such. “We may be a weak government but even if he would have succeeded the government would not go under,” he maintained.
He informed the jurors that his client obtained his license in 2017, renewed on 3rd March 2020 and was invited to State House by the President on 16 March 2020. Lawyer Conteh furthered that except the first accused has foresight but he could not have known if the current President would win the elections in 2018 and he (Palo) will be invited in 2020 for a meeting in which he would overthrow him (President Bio). “Don’t let anyone play you for fool- it’s an insult to your intelligence,” Lawyer Conteh told the jurors
He stated that the prosecution want the court to believe that Palo renewed his license because he wants to engage in a treasonable act, but they have failed to establish the motive that Palo wants to harm the president.
He said if Palo would have done such senior citizens in the conference room would have arrested him before the security descended on him. He said there were no notices on the walls of State House that prohibits the possession of pistols or knives at State House and the notices seen during the locus visit are new and printed after the trial started.
Lawyer Conteh toId the jurors that one of the most vital piece of real evidence which is the footage of the CCTV at State House that would have established or proved the case of the prosecution was not produced by the state, and that during the locus visit Colonel Kposowa was asked about the CCTV but refused to answer stating that it is based on security reason. On the charge of importation, Lawyer Conteh told the jurors that they should dismiss the said count because there is no evidence that says Palo imported a pistol into the country, but both pistols were given to him by his nephew and friend respectively.
He said the charge on perjury cannot stick in law because the accused did not lie under oath and no witness corroborated that. He said the case of the prosecution is full of sound and fury but signifies nothing and further asked that the Jurors reject the prosecution’s case and return a verdict of not guilty in all the charges levied on his client because the prosecution has failed to discharge the burden of proof.
In his address, prosecution Lawyer, Adrian Fisher Esq. informed the jurors that the crime committed is against Sierra Leone, and the evidence that has been tendered against the three accused persons are overwhelming and has been confirmed by the first accused person his additional witness in the witness stand. He said the case of the defense is false, lacks common sense and logic. “Lawyer Abdulai O. Conteh said lots of things but he said nothing. We will not make fool of you because you are intelligent people,” he mentioned.
He said they are only quoting what the laws say and not otherwise, adding that the Judge did not strike out any count and it is misleading for the prosecution to mention that. Lawyer Fisher furthered that one does not need twelve men to kill the President, and it makes no sense to think like that because there is an instance in which Foday Sankoh and Omrie Golly were charged separately for treason- “it is not new to suggest that one man alone cannot commit treason.”
He informed the jurors that Palo was on a mission at State House and that mission was to assassinate the President, and common sense would tell anyone that no civilian would have confronted a man who had trained in Libya for two years before becoming a military officer if he had taken the pistol to the conference room where a meeting was held.
Lawyer Fisher further told the jurors that the President meant well to invite Palo but the first accused breached that trust the President bestowed on him. He said Sierra Leone does not have the culture to attack a former minister the claim that the first accused carries the weapon because of the threat on his life is not true, and that there is no law that says any minister that leaves office should be given security after his tenure of office.
He told the jurors that whatever the CCTV will show the court has already been said in court. He said Sierra Leone doesn’t have a factory for guns so the first accused imported the gun and there is a law that says one should have a permit before importing any gun into Sierra Leone, and the first accused mentioning that the two pistols were brought into the country by his friend and nephew is an afterthought – “there was a plan and that plan was masterminded to be executed by the first accused.”
He said the first accused told the court that he has been using social media, so he had seen the call made by Sierra Leoneans for the current government to involve people that were part of the Ebola fight to join COVID19 fight, and it is not a coincidence for the first accused to renew his gun license because the first accused refused to take a book and pen to the meeting but rather took along a weapon with him.
He said the evidence against the first accused shows that there is a grievance, and he went to state house to settle the grievance violently, and further called on the jurors to return a verdict of guilty on all accused persons.
Matter has been adjourned to Tuesday 30 June 2020 for next hearing.
