Alfred Peter Conteh Shuns Sylvia Blyden
After Dr. Sylvia Blyden made a lot of publicity about her alignment with Alfred Peter Conteh in the ongoing petition matter against the All People’s Congress Party (APC), Ernest Bai Koroma – Chairman and Leader of the party, and Osman Foday Yansaneh – Secretary General of the party, the latter yesterday shunned the former outright in court.
While Sylvia Blyden asked the court to include his affidavit into the existing petition, counsel for the plaintiff, J.M Jengo, told the court that, he was directed by his client not to accept any partnership with Blyden.
Lawyer Ibrahim Mansaray for the first defendant earlier objected to the application that was filed by Blyden.
Mansaray raised the objection on the grounds that the application breeched order 31, Rule 1, Sub Rule 6 of the High Court Rules, submitting that all affidavits should be numbered before service.
🔥 Join Sierraloaded WhatsApp group for Latest Sierra Leone News, Sports & Entertainment Updates - CLICK HERE
🔥 Follow Sierraloaded on Facebook | Facebook Group | Twitter | Instagram | TikTok | Telegram | YouTube | LinkedIn
He noted that the pages should be numbered in a way that it should not contravene Order 31, Rule 1, Sub Rule 6 of the High Court Rules, therefore the affidavit should be struck out, accordingly.
He further argued that the content of the affidavit was faulty in every single paragraph, and added that is contained very scandalous averment against the first defendant.
He said paragraphs 3,11, and others of the affidavit of the plaintiff were never supported by any evidence or document.
Ibrahim Mansaray furthered submitted that in the proceedings of a civil case, every counsel would be present to represent his client, and that the first defendant is a former President, former Member of Parliament and a chairman and leader of the All People’s Congress Party, so the plaintiff should not use any scandalous statement against him.
- Advertisement -
He further argued that the court should strike-out the paragraph mentioned, which the applicant sought to be determined by the court, submitting that the Bench should also consider that none of the pages were numbered in the affidavit.