The Defense Team of Dr. Samura Kamara, has at the end of the court hearing Yesterday, declared that they will be heading for the Supreme Court.  

This happened immediately after the ruling of Justice Fisher at the Main Law Courts Building, Freetown, Yesterday the 21st February 2022. Lawyer Joseph F. Kamara stood up and informed the court that they will appeal each and every ruling delivered in respect of yesterday’s hearing and will readily file in the requisite document seeking the leave of the Judge. 

According to him, the judge acted outside his powers by going ahead to interpret Section 124, 66 and 64 of the Constitution, a mandate which he said is only reserved for the Supreme Court. 

Earlier, the defense team had filed an Application before the court seeking to quash the indictment upon which Dr. Samura and 5 others are standing trial at the High Court for corruption related offences, on the grounds that it was defective, but the High Court Judge, Hon. Justice Adrian Fisher dismissed such application on grounds of  the common law stating that an indictment may only be quashed where the facts stated in the said indictment, did not amount to an offence punishable by law.

The team asked that since the sixth accused, Jules Sanders Davies is a foreign national, he must not be tried in his absence and that if the prosecution wishes to do so, they should get the consent of the Attorney General before going ahead with it as provided by law.

But however, the Prosecution, headed by O.V Robin Mason Sr, argued that the Notice of Motion is defective as it does not comply with the High Court Rules of 2007 and that the persons who drafted the document have “no locus standi” to approach the court on behalf of the 6th accused or to act on his behalf.

With different views of the defense  team and the prosecution, Justice Fisher ruled that the indictment charged without the consent of the Attorney General is not bad in law and that the defense team have not been able to show why it would be unfair to try the other accused persons, if it were accepted that the 6th accused was wrongly charged. He then stated that the application to quash the indictment in that regard is therefore refused.