It’s very sad: Sonko delivers final address before Swiss Court
It was an emotional atmosphere at the last moment of hearing for the former Yahya Jammeh strongman. Through the three weeks, the session had witnessed it all: from his denials of crimes that prosecutors linked to him – to emotional breakdown of a victim who collapsed in court when Sonko attempted to justify actions of the security forces’ response to the April 2016 protests. “How could my client be the one in prison for the crimes committed by a government thousands of kilometers away, when the main man – in the person of Yahya Jammeh – continues to be free in a different jurisdiction, or his most senior government official – the vice president Isatou Nie Saidy –is walking free?” Phillipe Currat, defence lawyer said in his response to prosecutors’ demand for a life imprisonment for Sonko’s crimes. “I have tried to carry out my duties [as minister and IGP] to the best of my ability, for the interest of my country,” Sonko told the appeals chamber. “Yes, I know that we do not live in an ideal world,” he added, admitting that these crimes were committed in The Gambia. However, he, as minister, only heard about such abuses and violations. On this date, Sonko was reading what seemed to be a prepared statement as he stammered his way between phrases and sentences. Other times, he struggled to enunciate certain words in the pages held in his hands. His voice was shaky as he delivered this last address. “It is very sad!” he said, intermittently in his statement, as if it is designed to make a certain impact to the emotions of this listening audience. A week earlier, his tone was completely different in his attempt to defend his action in the charges of murder of Almamo Manneh, for example, or the armed police response to the April 16 protesters, despite its peaceful nature. Sonko was also held responsible for handing over the suspects to the NIA upon arrest, for further questioning, which subsequently resulted in their torture and death of one activist in custody. “Almamo Manneh’s dead body was never handed to the family for burial. Neither did Solo Sandeng. Instead, they were held by the state and secretly buried afterwards,” prosecutors charged. “This shows that the state made deliberate efforts to conceal the crimes that they committed against the civilian population of The Gambia,” an argument the prosecutors found to be systematic method of punishing opponents of the Yahya Jammeh regime for two decades of rule in West Africa’s tiniest mainland country. Prosecutors further charged that efforts from international human rights bodies like Amnesty International and UN Special Rapporteur on torture and extrajudicial killings, among many others went on deaf years in The Gambia. In the midst of all these was a man whom Yahya Jammeh entrusted in maintaining internal security for ten years. “Torture is not acceptable, Mr President,” Sonko told the court, adding that he had made every effort to ensure that men and women under his effective command and authority followed human rights standards and guidelines in their work to the letter. “Solo Sandeng’s death and torture of victims of April 14 became a stain on the country,” Sonko said. “I sympathized with his family and all victims who testified here as witnesses. I have condemned these acts throughout my testimony and I continue to condemn them even today,” he added. “I hope that the deliberations here contribute to reconciliation in my country,” Sonko added, expressing regret about his inability to testify in the TRRC – a body he earlier described as biased in its truth-seeking and reconciliation mandate for the country. His lawyer, in the meantime, made a robust defense, delivering hundreds of pages of address to the court, using hours and days at some point, to convince the court that his client was innocent of the crimes against humanity, or that the trial chamber lacked jurisdiction to hear any such crimes in the first place. For instance, on the charges of rape, Mr Currat argued thus: “For the sake of completeness, before listing the numerous factual inconsistencies, it should be noted that it is difficult to understand how the multitude of rapes committed against a single person is supposed to serve as an effective means of supporting a policy of widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population.” “As regards the punishment for the attempted coup of March 2006, this does not constitute an attack, but a reaction by the state to an attempted coup organised by the highest-ranking officials of the army.” For Currat’s client, he had done everything he could to prove respect for human right principles at policy levels while he was minister in The Gambia – despite what prosecutors would make the court believe. But whether that absolves him of responsibility or not, would be decided in weeks or months to come, when the court delivers its final verdict on this important universal jurisdiction case.
Black News 
It was an emotional atmosphere at the last moment of hearing for the former Yahya Jammeh strongman. Through the three weeks, the session had witnessed it all: from his denials of crimes that prosecutors linked to him – to emotional breakdown of a victim who collapsed in court when Sonko attempted to justify actions of the security forces’ response to the April 2016 protests.
“How could my client be the one in prison for the crimes committed by a government thousands of kilometers away, when the main man – in the person of Yahya Jammeh – continues to be free in a different jurisdiction, or his most senior government official – the vice president Isatou Nie Saidy –is walking free?” Phillipe Currat, defence lawyer said in his response to prosecutors’ demand for a life imprisonment for Sonko’s crimes.
“I have tried to carry out my duties [as minister and IGP] to the best of my ability, for the interest of my country,” Sonko told the appeals chamber. “Yes, I know that we do not live in an ideal world,” he added, admitting that these crimes were committed in The Gambia. However, he, as minister, only heard about such abuses and violations.
On this date, Sonko was reading what seemed to be a prepared statement as he stammered his way between phrases and sentences. Other times, he struggled to enunciate certain words in the pages held in his hands. His voice was shaky as he delivered this last address. “It is very sad!” he said, intermittently in his statement, as if it is designed to make a certain impact to the emotions of this listening audience.
A week earlier, his tone was completely different in his attempt to defend his action in the charges of murder of Almamo Manneh, for example, or the armed police response to the April 16 protesters, despite its peaceful nature. Sonko was also held responsible for handing over the suspects to the NIA upon arrest, for further questioning, which subsequently resulted in their torture and death of one activist in custody.
“Almamo Manneh’s dead body was never handed to the family for burial. Neither did Solo Sandeng. Instead, they were held by the state and secretly buried afterwards,” prosecutors charged. “This shows that the state made deliberate efforts to conceal the crimes that they committed against the civilian population of The Gambia,” an argument the prosecutors found to be systematic method of punishing opponents of the Yahya Jammeh regime for two decades of rule in West Africa’s tiniest mainland country.
Prosecutors further charged that efforts from international human rights bodies like Amnesty International and UN Special Rapporteur on torture and extrajudicial killings, among many others went on deaf years in The Gambia. In the midst of all these was a man whom Yahya Jammeh entrusted in maintaining internal security for ten years.
“Torture is not acceptable, Mr President,” Sonko told the court, adding that he had made every effort to ensure that men and women under his effective command and authority followed human rights standards and guidelines in their work to the letter.
“Solo Sandeng’s death and torture of victims of April 14 became a stain on the country,” Sonko said. “I sympathized with his family and all victims who testified here as witnesses. I have condemned these acts throughout my testimony and I continue to condemn them even today,” he added.
“I hope that the deliberations here contribute to reconciliation in my country,” Sonko added, expressing regret about his inability to testify in the TRRC – a body he earlier described as biased in its truth-seeking and reconciliation mandate for the country.
His lawyer, in the meantime, made a robust defense, delivering hundreds of pages of address to the court, using hours and days at some point, to convince the court that his client was innocent of the crimes against humanity, or that the trial chamber lacked jurisdiction to hear any such crimes in the first place. For instance, on the charges of rape, Mr Currat argued thus:
“For the sake of completeness, before listing the numerous factual inconsistencies, it should be noted that it is difficult to understand how the multitude of rapes committed against a single person is supposed to serve as an effective means of supporting a policy of widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population.”
“As regards the punishment for the attempted coup of March 2006, this does not constitute an attack, but a reaction by the state to an attempted coup organised by the highest-ranking officials of the army.”
For Currat’s client, he had done everything he could to prove respect for human right principles at policy levels while he was minister in The Gambia – despite what prosecutors would make the court believe. But whether that absolves him of responsibility or not, would be decided in weeks or months to come, when the court delivers its final verdict on this important universal jurisdiction case.
