A prosecution witness testified Tuesday at the High Court that former Lands Minister Sheriff Abba Sanyang's actions regarding land allocation in Kassa Kunda were legitimate and aligned with his duties. The witness, a former government official, told the High Court that former Lands Minister Sheriff Abba Sanyang’s involvement in the allocation of land at Kassa Kunda was genuine and consistent with his responsibilities. State witness Buba Sanyang stated unequivocally that "Sheriff Abba Sanyang had not issued any false directive and that his involvement was genuine." Mr. Sanyang, along with six co-accused individuals, faces a range of serious charges. These charges include abuse of office, providing false information to a public servant, criminal trespass, and obtaining money by false pretences. Prosecutors have alleged that the accused unlawfully entered state-owned forfeited land and subsequently sold portions to several private companies. These companies include Himfirm3 Company Ltd, Soninkara Real Estate, A & I Real Assets Management, and Buildmatic Construction Ltd. All accused persons have steadfastly denied these allegations, setting the stage for a protracted legal battle.
Witness Testimony Details
Buba Sanyang, the key state witness, provided extensive evidence before Justice Ebrima Jaiteh. Mr. Sanyang's professional background lends significant weight to his testimony; he is a former Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Lands and currently serves as Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Fisheries. The State’s legal team was robustly represented by Director of Public Prosecutions Abdul Maita Yusuf and State Counsel A. Gibba. On the defence side, Counsel K. Sanyang appeared for the first accused, Sheriff Abba Sanyang, while Counsel Darboe represented the second to sixth accused persons, ensuring full legal representation for all involved parties.
During his testimony, Buba Sanyang clarified critical aspects of land governance and allocation. He testified that a Village Development Committee (VDC) cannot independently sell land unless it is acting on behalf of rightful landowners. This distinction is key in understanding the legal framework surrounding land transactions at the local level. He further confirmed that members of the Kassa Kunda Village Development Committee had indeed sold land, stating it was true that the Kassa Kunda VDC was engaged in selling land. The witness also provided insight into the role of the Minister of Lands, testifying that the Minister serves as the ultimate custodian of land and, by virtue of this role, could not act improperly in that capacity. This statement directly supported the defence's assertion of the former minister's legitimate involvement.
Regarding the intricate land allocation procedures, Buba Sanyang responded to questions by detailing the authority vested in local leaders. He explained that an Alkalo has the inherent authority to verify the legitimacy of land ownership before any allocation can proceed. This notes the traditional and administrative layers involved in land management. He also stated that ownership rights can be allocated to various entities, specifically mentioning communities, individuals, and 'kabilos', which are traditional family or clan groupings. The witness further noted a significant policy decision following the acquisition of land by former president Yahya Jammeh. He explained that the government subsequently allocated 40 per cent of the land to affected communities and previous landowners, a measure intended to address historical grievances and ensure equitable distribution. This policy detail provides important context for the current proceedings, suggesting a precedent for government intervention in land redistribution.
Context of Land Allocation
State witness Buba Sanyang’s testimony extended beyond the specifics of Kassa Kunda, providing a broader historical and administrative context for land allocation practices in the region. He testified that the allocation of land parcels was not exclusive to Kassa Kunda. He clarified that Brufut and other villages had similarly benefited from land allocation processes, indicating that the practices under scrutiny were part of a wider governmental approach rather than an isolated incident in Kassa Kunda. This testimony aimed to provide broader context regarding land distribution practices beyond the specific village at the center of the current case, suggesting a pattern of land management rather than an anomaly.
During the proceedings, a key document central to the land dispute was formally admitted as evidence. This document, identified as Exhibit D1, was a letter specifically addressed to the Alkalo of Kassa Kunda. The letter explicitly concerned forfeited land, which had been previously acquired by the state. Crucially, it outlined the government's established policy of allocating 40 per cent of such land back to the original owners or affected communities. This detail directly corroborated Buba Sanyang's earlier testimony regarding the post-acquisition actions following former president Yahya Jammeh's land acquisition, reinforcing the witness's account of the government's commitment to returning a significant portion of the land to its original stakeholders. The introduction of Exhibit D1 provides concrete documentary evidence supporting the witness's claims about the land allocation process in Kassa Kunda, lending further credibility to the defence's arguments. The letter's contents show the institutional mechanisms in place for managing and redistributing land that had been previously taken into state ownership, thereby strengthening the narrative that the actions taken were within established governmental policy.
Legal Proceedings and Next Steps
Following the extensive testimony and the admission of key evidence, Justice Ebrima Jaiteh adjourned the matter until July 14, 2026, at 10:00 am. This adjournment will allow for the continuation of proceedings in the high-profile Kassa Kunda land case, a matter that has drawn significant public and legal attention. The court has scheduled the testimony of Prosecution Witness Two (PW2) for the next hearing, indicating that the prosecution will continue to present its case following the cross-examination of Buba Sanyang. The duration of the adjournment suggests the complexity of the case and the need for ample time for all legal processes to unfold. The legal proceedings are expected to delve further into the intricacies of land ownership, ministerial authority, and the role of local committees in land transactions, as both the prosecution and defence continue to present their respective arguments and evidence before the High Court.
