State Prosecutor Claims There Is Strong Evidence to Convict All 26 Military Officers in Court Martial

In the ongoing Court Martial trial of twenty-six military officers, State Prosecutor Joseph Sesay has presented a robust closing argument, asserting that there is ample evidence to convict all accused individuals. On August 5, 2024, Sesay addressed the Judge Advocate and the seven-member panel, emphasizing that the prosecution’s case is supported by substantial evidence against the defendants.

The prosecutor detailed that the accused, all members of the Republic of Sierra Leone Armed Forces (RSLAF), face a total of 88 charges, including mutiny, conspiracy, and murder, related to their involvement in the failed coup attempt on November 26, 2023. Sesay underscored that the evidence demonstrates clear violations of military conduct and statutory regulations.

Sesay pointed out that the case initially involved 27 soldiers, but after one, Sergeant Alhaji Koroma, pleaded guilty to certain charges, the prosecution adjusted the case accordingly. Koroma’s guilty plea on some counts allowed the state to focus on the remaining defendants who were charged with similar offenses.

The prosecutor elaborated on how the evidence presented in court includes testimonies from 37 witnesses and 188 exhibits, which collectively establish the defendants’ roles in the alleged coup. Notably, Sesay highlighted Koroma’s admissions regarding the planning and execution of the coup, which implicated the other accused.

According to Sesay, the prosecution has successfully demonstrated that the accused engaged in unlawful activities, including aiding the enemy and failing to prevent the attack on military facilities. He also asserted that the actions of the accused led to the deaths of military personnel, police officers, and civilians.

The prosecutor emphasized that it is the State’s responsibility to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and he urged the Board Members to carefully review all evidence and testimonies. Sesay reiterated that if the evidence did not meet the required standard, it would be the Board Members’ duty to return a not guilty verdict.

In conclusion, Sesay maintained that the prosecution has provided sufficient evidence to support convictions on all charges, urging the court to deliver a verdict that reflects the gravity of the offenses committed. The trial will continue as the court reviews the detailed evidence and documentation provided.