The defence team in a D30 million civil suit filed by Gambian musician Momodou Lamin Jarju, popularly known as Rongo, has on 23 June 2026 applied for an adjournment to allow time for the certification of documents intended to be relied upon during the trial.
The case, before the High Court in Banjul, involves claims of unlawful arrest and detention, malicious prosecution and loss of earnings allegedly arising from the conduct of the defendants. The last adjourned date was 14 May 2026, and on that day, the judge asked the defendants to come with original documents or certified documents.
The defendants in the suit are Momodou Lungs Jarju, Alkalo of Banjulinding; Imam Yahya Bah of Banjulinding; Lala Njie, legal representative of Malang Njie; Dawda Badjie, legal representative of Modou Badjie; Landing Korteh; Abdou Jarju, legal representative of Lamin Nafulou Jarju; Hamadou Ceesay, legal representative of Jarbel Ceesay; Foday Barry, a former senior officer of the Drug Law Enforcement Agency, The Gambia (DLEAG); the Inspector General of Police; and the Director General of DLEAG.
The plaintiff is seeking D30 million in damages, comprising D10 million for unlawful arrest and detention, D10 million for malicious prosecution and D10 million for loss of earnings.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
When the matter came before Justice Sarah Aryee on 23 June 2026, Counsel M.L. Ceesay announced his appearance for the plaintiff (Rongo) while Senior Counsel Kebba Sanyang appeared for the defendants.
Counsel Sanyang for the defendants applied for a further adjournment, informing the court that some documents the defence intends to rely on had not yet been certified.
"We still have some documents that are not yet certified, and we will want to rely on them in this court. Therefore, I seek an adjournment to make sure that the documents are certified before the next adjourned date," Counsel Sanyang told the court.
Counsel M.L. Ceesay opposed the application, arguing that the defence had sufficient time to prepare the documents, noting that the matter had already been adjourned for nearly a month. According to counsel for the plaintiff, the defence was aware that the documents required certification before being tendered in evidence.
After hearing submissions from both sides, Justice Aryee stated that court records showed that the defence had been regularly attending proceedings. As a result, she declined to award costs against the defendants.
The judge, however, urged the defence to ensure that all documents intended for use in the case are properly certified before the next hearing date to avoid further delays in the proceedings.
The matter was subsequently adjourned to November 2026 to continue the hearing. Court proceedings also revealed that the plaintiff had tendered approximately 35 documents before closing his case.
Readers would recall that on Thursday, 14 May 2026, Momodou Lungs Jarju officially entered the witness box to testify before the court. While giving his testimony, the witness told the court that he is the Alkalo of Banjulinding Village. He further stated that Banjulinding was formerly under the Kombo North District but is now under Busumbala.
Defence Counsel K Sanyang, who appeared for the Alkalo, asked him whether he would be able to identify his witness statement if shown to him. The witness responded in the affirmative and confirmed that the statement bore his signature. A witness statement was then shown to him, which he identified as his statement before the court. Counsel Sanyang further asked the witness whether he would also be able to recognise the list of documents he intended to rely on as evidence in the case. Momodou Lungs Jarju again responded positively. A document was subsequently shown to him, which he confirmed was the list of documents he intended to rely on as evidence before the court.
Following the identification of the documents, Counsel K Sanyang informed the court that he intended to tender the two documents and have them marked as exhibits. However, Lawyer M.L. Ceesay, who appeared for the plaintiff Rongo, objected to the attempt to tender the list of documents into evidence. He argued before the court that the documents being presented were not original copies and therefore could not be tendered and marked as exhibits. According to Lawyer Ceesay, during the pre-trial stage of the matter, the documents had only been marked for identification purposes and were not formally tendered before the court. He submitted that once the defence intended to tender the documents during testimony, the originals should be produced before the court.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Defence Counsel K Sanyang, however, argued that the list of documents had already been marked and tendered during the pre-trial proceedings of the case. The plaintiff's counsel disputed that position and maintained that the documents had not yet been formally tendered.
Presiding Judge Justice Sarah Aryee later addressed both parties on the issue. Justice Aryee told the court that the documents had indeed been marked during pre-trial proceedings but had not been tendered as exhibits before the court.
The judge then directed defence counsel to produce and tender the original documents as contained in the list of documents on the next adjourned date. Following the exchanges between both parties and the conclusion of the Judge, the matter was adjourned to 23 and 24 June 2026 for continuation of proceedings.
