The Gambia Bar Association (GBA) has accused the country’s judiciary of delaying a constitutional suit challenging the appointment and eligibility of Chief Justice Edi M.O. Faal, warning that the continued inaction could erode public confidence in the justice system.
The association said the suit, filed on July 31, 2026, had remained unassigned to a Supreme Court Justice and had not been listed for hearing more than three months after its commencement.
In a statement issued on Monday, November 9, the GBA described the delay as troubling, particularly because the case concerns the constitutional qualifications of the country’s highest judicial officer.
The association noted that the office of the Chief Justice carries significant constitutional responsibilities, including a place in the presidential line of succession, and said the challenge therefore required prompt judicial attention.
The GBA disclosed that it had expected the Supreme Court to issue procedural directions during the judicial vacation to allow parties file their submissions and enable the matter to proceed when the courts resumed in October.
However, it said no meaningful judicial action had been taken.
Chief Justice’s role questioned
The association said its lawyers wrote to the Supreme Court Registrar on October 26, requesting that the case be urgently assigned and progressed.
According to the GBA, the Registrar replied on October 30 that the case file had been received and forwarded to the Chief Justice for directives, which would be communicated “if and when received.”
The association described the response as inadequate, arguing that the Chief Justice should not exercise discretionary control over proceedings challenging his own appointment.
It maintained that the case should be assigned to independent Supreme Court Justices without any personal interest in its outcome.
The GBA also disclosed that the Attorney General had applied for the Chief Justice to recuse himself from the proceedings, an application the association said it did not oppose.
It argued that while the Chief Justice may have general administrative responsibilities, decisions concerning the assignment of judges, hearing dates and constitution of judicial panels could directly affect the proceedings.
The association said its request was not for the Registry to determine the constitutional dispute, but for the case to be placed before an independent Justice for procedural directions and eventual hearing.
Association demands urgent action
The GBA said its lawyers wrote again on November 3 seeking clarification and urgent action but had yet to receive a response.
It also raised concerns about other cases allegedly awaiting attention at the Supreme Court, including matters involving urgent applications.
The association warned that the approaching end of the judicial term in December could further delay the case, potentially pushing the constitutional challenge into another term without a court hearing.
It called on the judiciary to clarify whether any directives had been issued concerning the suit and, if not, explain the reasons for the delay.
The GBA further demanded that the case file be immediately placed before an independent Supreme Court Justice for preliminary directions, with the pending applications subsequently listed and heard.
The association stressed that it was not seeking a predetermined outcome but wanted the constitutional questions raised in the suit to be determined through a fair and impartial judicial process.
It warned that any interference by a party with a personal interest in the matter could raise serious concerns about fair hearing and the administration of justice.
The GBA said it reserved the right to pursue appropriate legal steps if the case was not urgently assigned and heard.
You must be logged in to post a comment.