Former President Koroma Demands Le10 Billion Security Cost From APC Member
Ernest Bai Koroma, former President of Sierra Leone and Chairman of the All People’s Congress (APC) has asked the court to grant him security cost in tune of two billion leones against a member of the APC, Alfred Peter Conteh.
Alfred Peter Conteh had recently took the APC Chairman Ernest Bai Koroma, the party’s Secretary General, Osman Foday Yansanneh, as the second defendant, and the APC, as the third defendant, to court citing their illegitimate leadership.
The lead counsel representing Ernest Bai Koroma, Lawyer Ibrahim Mansaray who appeared in court yesterday before Justice Adrian Fisher with a host of other lawyers moved the application courtesy of an Originating Notice of Motion dated 5th March 2021 on behalf of first defendant Ernest Bai Koroma.
He maintained that the said application is supported by an affidavit sworn to by Adewale Showers, with some exhibits in it.
Lawyer Mansaray furthered that the authority to grant or refuse the application rests with the court.
According to Mr. Mansaray, since the Plaintiff Applicant Alfred Peter Conteh is presently out of reach of the jurisdiction of the court, it is but prudent on their side to ask for such an amount to be set aside by the plaintiff, considering the amount of money his client is spending on law firms to represent him in court.
The young and erudite lawyer said there is no evidence in court that the Plaintiff Applicant has fixed assets within the reach of the court. He concluded that the said money cannot be paid into his client’s hands but to the court which can best determine what amount should go to the defendant, when the needs arises.
Responding to the said application, the sole lawyer representing the plaintiff Jesse Jengo also filed an affidavit in opposition dated 9th March 2021 sworn to by one Rashid Santigie Sesay at the Law Court Building.
He told the court that the affidavit filed in by the first defendant didn’t proffer reasons why a security cost of Le 10 billion should be set aside by the plaintiff.
He said even if the court ruled against him, such money is too exorbitant to be demanded by the defendant counsels.
After listening to both counsels’ submissions, Justice Fisher later adjourned the mater to 17th March 2021 for ruling, while the injunction on the party still continues.