Criminal Procedure and Evidence: Forum, Custody and Proof at Trial
What the paper tests
Gambian criminal litigation runs on three layers: the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) for arrest, charge, bail, trial and appeal; the Evidence Act together with the common-law residue for proof; and Chapter IV of the 1997 Constitution for fair-trial guarantees. The examiner rewards a candidate who can place a fact pattern in the right forum and at the right procedural stage, then apply the evidential rule that actually governs it.
Process points that carry marks
- Arrest may be with or without warrant; the suspect must be told the reason promptly and brought before a court within the constitutional limit (72 hours), the court then deciding remand or bail.
- Bail is discretionary, with a presumption in favour of the accused for non-capital offences; the court weighs flight risk, interference with witnesses and the gravity of the charge.
- Summary offences are tried in the Magistrates' Courts; indictable offences reach the High Court after a preliminary inquiry at which the prosecution must show a prima facie case.
- At the close of the prosecution, a no-case submission succeeds only where no reasonable tribunal could convict; otherwise the accused elects to testify, call witnesses or stay silent.
- Confessions must be voluntary. A disputed confession is tried on the voir dire, with the prosecution bearing the burden. Corroboration warnings are required for accomplices and children, but a conviction may stand on uncorroborated evidence if the court warns itself.
Worked example
Police arrest D without warrant on Friday for shopbreaking, hold him until Wednesday without access to a court, and obtain a written statement after telling him 'it will go better for you'. He is then charged, and counsel objects at trial.
Reasoning: the detention breaches the constitutional time limit and the inducement throws voluntariness into doubt, so the prosecution must prove voluntariness beyond reasonable doubt on the voir dire. If it fails, the statement is excluded. If the court finds it voluntary, the 72-hour breach does not automatically exclude it, but goes to weight and supports a separate constitutional claim for compensation. The admission is evidence only against its maker, not against a co-accused.
Traps
Treating every procedural breach as automatically fatal; importing the civil standard into the voir dire; forgetting that identification evidence requires a Turnbull-type warning; and assuming an accused's silence can be used as evidence of guilt.