The State has dropped the remaining murder charges against former soldier Sanna Manjang and replaced them with two counts of assault causing actual bodily harm, as the prosecution formally closed its case before the High Court.
The development came on Friday, 17 July 2026, before Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh. The State was represented by Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions (DDPP) E.R. Dougan and State Counsel M. Jammeh, while Sanna Manjang was represented by Counsel Sheriff Kumba Jobe.
Dougan informed the court that the prosecution had filed a further amended information dated 16 July 2026 and had served it on both the court and the defence. She asked the court to arraign the accused on the amended charges and take a fresh plea.
Counsel Jobe objected, arguing that the prosecution should not be allowed to change the charges in the middle of the trial. He told the court that the case began in January 2026 with a two-count indictment for murder. In March, the indictment was amended to six counts before being reduced to four counts. He said the latest amendment sought to replace the remaining murder charges with two counts of assault.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Jobe argued that the repeated amendments did not amount to legitimate prosecutorial corrections but reflected "a calculated strategy" after the prosecution failed to produce sufficient evidence to prove the murder charges.
He presented two main arguments against the amendment. First, he argued that if the prosecution had closed its case under the existing indictment, the defence would likely have succeeded in making a no-case-to-answer submission on the murder charges, which could have resulted in Manjang's acquittal on those counts. He submitted that allowing the amendment after several witnesses had testified and after the defence had prepared to answer murder allegations would deprive the accused of the opportunity to seek dismissal of those charges for lack of sufficient evidence.
Secondly, Jobe argued that Manjang had spent nearly seven months in detention largely because of the seriousness of the murder charges. He said withdrawing those charges at the close of the prosecution's case would undermine the accused's legitimate expectations and amount to an injustice.
The defence relied on Section 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 2025, arguing that amendments to criminal charges are only permissible where the statutory conditions are met and where they do not prejudice the accused. Jobe urged the court to reject the application and proceed on the existing indictment.
He also argued that it was improper for the prosecution to continue amending the charges at that stage of the proceedings.
In response, Dougan relied on Section 85 of the Constitution, arguing that it gives the Director of Public Prosecutions the power to institute and conduct criminal proceedings, including amending charges where necessary based on the available evidence. She told the court that the amendment was made "in the interest of justice" and said the defence would still have the opportunity to recall witnesses for further cross-examination if necessary.
Dougan also argued that the defence's reliance on Section 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act was misplaced because the amendment had been initiated by the prosecution rather than directed by the court. She maintained that the prosecution's constitutional powers under Section 85 governed the amendment.
In reply, Jobe argued that the constitutional powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions are not absolute and remain subject to judicial oversight to ensure fairness. He maintained that Section 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act was the applicable provision and again urged the court to refuse the amendment.
In her ruling, Justice Jobarteh held that the prosecution has the legal right to amend charges at any stage of a trial under the Criminal Procedure Act, 2025. She ruled that the requirements of Section 218 had been satisfied and that allowing the amendment would not prejudice the accused. Justice Jobarteh also held that the further amended information had been properly filed and served on the defence and that the court could not disregard a document properly before it simply because no separate formal application had been made. She overruled the defence's objection and directed that the accused take his plea on the amended charges.
After the Assistant Registrar read the charges, Manjang confirmed that he understood them. He pleaded not guilty to both counts of assault causing actual bodily harm. The court entered pleas of not guilty and struck out the two murder charges. Following the plea, Dougan informed the court that the prosecution was closing its case. Counsel Jobe said the defence had not been informed in advance that the prosecution intended to close its case.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
He then made an oral application for bail, arguing that the accused now faced only two counts of assault causing actual bodily harm, which are bailable offences. Dougan asked the court to direct that the bail application be made formally in writing. Justice Jobarteh granted the request.
Jobe also informed the court that the defence intended to file a no-case-to-answer submission and would not be opening its defence. According to the new indictmenr, the first count alleged that Manjang assaulted Tamsir Jasseh at the former National Intelligence Agency premises in March 2006 while serving in the Gambia Armed Forces as a member of a group known as the "Black Blacks" or "Junglers". The prosecution alleged that he beat and kicked Jasseh, causing actual bodily harm.
The second count alleged that Manjang assaulted military officer Yaya M.S. Darboe in Banjul during the same period while serving as a member of the "Black Blacks" or "Junglers". The prosecution alleged that he beat Darboe with sticks, poured molten hot plastic on his body, tied him in a sack and hoisted him, causing serious injuries and bleeding to his face, body and leg.
The case was adjourned to 28 July 2026 at 9:30am for the hearing of the bail application.
