Charlie is free!

Good news.  Charlie is back in London after escaping his false detention in the Gambia.  We are all delighted with this news.

Charlie was left with no option but to leave the country as it was clear that he would not receive a fair trial in the country as the President of the Gambia seemed intent on using him as a pawn in his attempt to extort ownership of Charlie’s employer’s assets in the country.

Fair Trials Abroad has consistently said that the charges against Charlie were “trumped up.”

Charlie will be returning to his family as quickly as possible.

Gambia: Under Pressure — A report on the rule of law in the Gambia – Part One

Gambia: Under Pressure — A report on the rule of law in the Gambia – Part One

April 28, 2008 09:36 AM

By Senegambia August 2006, An International Bar Association Human Rights Institute Report, Supported by the Foundation Open Sociaty Institute.   Executive summary     The executive summary of the report of a fact-finding mission to the Republic of the Gambia (the Gambia) by an International Bar Association (IBA) delegation between 12 and 16 June 2006. The mission was prompted by concerns regarding the status of the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and the ability of the legal profession to exercise its professional duties freely. These concerns arose following reports about the removal of the Chief Justice in February 2006, the lack of security of tenure of foreign judges appointed on contracts, and the ongoing boycott by the Gambia Bar Association (GBA) of a High Court judge. The coup attempt in March 2006, which occurred subsequent to the decision to visit the Gambia, also raised concerns about the rule of law situation in the country.   The mission was organised by the Human Rights Institute of the IBA. The delegation’s terms of reference were to examine:   (1) the current legal status of lawyers and judges in the Gambia and their ability to carry out their professional duties freely;   (2) the legal guarantees for the effective functioning of the justice system, including the independence of the judiciary and whether these guarantees are respected in practice;   (3) impediments, either in law or practice, that jeopardise the administration of justice and the respect for the rule of law and international and regional human rights standards; and   (4) to make recommendations with respect to the above. The high level delegation held meetings with members of the executive, legislature and judiciary, representatives of the Gambia Bar Association and practising lawyers, members of the international diplomatic corps and donor community, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media. The delegation wishes to express its sincere gratitude for the hospitality and assistance given by all those it met.   The delegation comprised Justice Yvonne Mokgoro, Constitutional Court of South Africa; Sternford Moyo, Deputy President of the Southern African Development Community Lawyers Association, Former President of the Zimbabwe Law Society; Greg Mayne, Programme Manager, Human Rights Institute, International Bar Association and Alex Wilks, Parliamentary Legal Officer to Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC.   The full conclusions and recommendations of the mission are set out in Chapter 7 of this report.   Summary of conclusions   The judicial system in the Gambia suffers from neglect, under investment, and a severe lack of resources and infrastructure, resulting from a general deprioritisation of its importance. Whilst the government was supportive of the independence of the judiciary in discussions with the delegation, in practice many of its actions undermined judicial independence and the rule of law, and its overall attitude to the judiciary was of grave concern to the delegation. This has created a climate where the protection of human rights is undermined and the rule of law subverted.   The majority of judges in the Gambia are appointed on contracts from other African Commonwealth countries, mainly under the UK Department for International Development/Commonwealth Secretariat (‘DFID/CS scheme’), and Ghanaian and Nigerian technical assistance schemes. At the time of the delegation’s visit, there were only three Gambian nationals serving at the bench.   The constitutional appointment procedure for judges, given the dominance of the President and the executive over the appointments to the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), the apparent lack of transparency with respect to the JSC processes, the absence of a clearly elaborated selection process and criteria for judicial appointments, exposes judicial appointments to political influence. There are serious concerns that the appointment of contract judges operates outside the constitutional appointment procedure, and that the precise role of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) in this regard is unclear and limited.   The failure of the government to follow the proper constitutional procedures in relation to the removal of judges, and shortcomings of the DFID/CS scheme with regard to security of tenure has created an atmosphere in which judges are unable to operate freely for fear of having their contracts terminated, or not renewed, if they deliver politically unpopular judgments. This undermines public confidence in the judiciary and this lack of confidence is manifested most prominently by the unwillingness of Gambian lawyers to consider a career at the bench.   There are a number of infrastructure needs which affect the proper administration of justice. The lack of law reporting is of particular concern as it restricts the judiciary in its fundamental duty to give reasoned judgments. The lack of stenographers and court reporters further impedes the judiciary in carrying out its duties effectively and contributes to the backlog of cases. The absence of IT support, inadequate research facilities and the absence of continuing legal education for judges is also detrimental to the proper functioning of the justice system.   The delegation was concerned at the frequent disregard or delay in compliance with court orders by members of the executive, particularly those which are politically unpopular. It is apparent that the executive has on such occasions considered itself above the rule of law. This poses a serious threat to the authority and independence of the judiciary and undermines confidence in the legal system.   The existence of a mutually reinforcing relationship between the judiciary and the legal profession is an essential element in ensuring the independent and effective functioning of the judicial system. The ongoing boycott of a High Court judge, Justice Paul, by the Gambia Bar Association is severely detrimental to public confidence in the administration of justice, and the relationship between the government and the legal profession. Given the strength of feeling and the material disputes of fact on this situation, and without being able to conduct a full analysis of all relevant documentation, the delegation considers that it is unable to draw a definitive conclusion on the matter.   Whilst a basic framework is in place, the legal profession is, in practice, largely unregulated. The General Legal Council lacks capacity and is virtually inoperative. The Gambia Bar Association suffers from a lack of financial and technical capacity and is insufficiently engaged in legal reform and other initiatives. The delegation welcomes the commitment of the current executive of the Gambia Bar Association to substantially increase its activities. Whilst the delegation appreciates that the legal profession may be operating in challenging circumstances, the delegation was concerned at the practice of the Gambia Bar Association of boycotting judges, as such boycotts undermine the status and integrity of the legal profession and undermine the effective functioning of the justice system.   The government exhibits hostility and suspicion in its dealings with the legal profession and it was clear to the delegation that the government perceives the profession as an oppositional force. The level of animosity between the Gambia Bar Association and the government and the inability of the executive to disassociate lawyers from the causes of their clients is severely detrimental to the effective functioning of the justice system and to the ability of lawyers to carry out their professional duties freely.   There is currently an atmosphere of fear amongst lawyers, emanating from the attempted murder of a lawyer and several other incidents of harassment and intimidation of lawyers, that they may face serious adverse consequences as a result of their acceptance of certain causes on behalf of their clients. This fear is a serious threat to the independence of the legal profession and the administration of justice.   The removal of the possibility of bail for certain charges is a violation of the presumption of innocence and the right to liberty guaranteed in the Constitution and international human rights instruments, in particular Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It was apparent to the delegation that the non-bailable offences legislation was having a deterrent effect on detainees or their legal representatives from challenging their detention, and that it was being used as a means of ensuring cooperation with government authorities. To this extent, the nonbailable offences legislation was being used as a means of intimidation and coercion.   Freedom of expression in the Gambia is limited through restrictive legislation and the harassment of journalists, and in recent months there has been a sustained attack on the journalistic community. The delegation was concerned to hear reports of mistreatment of detainees, including floggings and prolonged solitary confinement. The delegation was deeply concerned about the government practice of detaining individuals for long periods of time with charge, without access to family or legal counsel, or without bringing them before a court in order to ensure adequate judicial oversight.   Summary of recommendations   • The delegation welcomes the government’s statements in support of judicial independence and the rule of law and encourages the government to give greater priority to the judiciary in the allocation of state resources. The government must comply promptly with all orders of the judiciary, or challenge them through constitutional and legal processes. The delegation encourages the government to be temperate in its criticism of judicial decisions and to refrain from attacking them personally. • The delegation encourages the government to make a more concerted effort to engage the support of the international donor community to strengthen the operation of the judicial system and the independence of the judiciary. • The government must ensure that all judicial appointments and removals, including those of contract judges, are subject to the proper constitutional procedure. With respect to the removals of contract judges under the DFID/CS scheme, this should be specified in the contract of service. In order to ensure security of tenure, DFID/CS and the government are urged to extend the period of fixed-term contracts to five years. The Attorney-General is urged to act upon his assurance that all future removals will take place in accordance with the Constitution.   • The operation of the JSC should be strengthened by diversifying the nominating authority for members of the JSC, and by conducting its procedures for the identification of candidates for judicial office in a transparent manner.   • The government should raise the salaries of the judiciary and the magistracy in order to attract suitably qualified members of the Gambian legal profession to the bench on a permanent basis.   • The President and the Attorney General must publicly reiterate the obligation of all branches of government and the constituent parts of the executive branch, in particular the police, prisons, national intelligence agency and other security forces, of the obligation to comply with court orders promptly.   • The judiciary should be provided with an adequate budgetary allocation. This is essential to ensure the effective functioning of the judiciary and the proper administration of justice. The Chief Justice, through the JSC and in consultation with relevant stakeholders, should develop a plan of action for improving the operations of the court system.   • The situation regarding the ongoing boycott of Justice Paul by the Gambia Bar Association must be resolved as soon as possible, through an independent commission of inquiry established in accordance with the Constitution.   • Resources should be allocated to the General Legal Council in order to make it operational and capable of discharging its functions in accordance with the Legal Practitioners Act and consideration should be given to giving statutory recognition to the Gambia Bar Association and entrusting it with the regulation of the profession. The Gambia Bar Association should establish a permanent Secretariat and take a more active role in legal reform and other initiatives. A Gambia Law Faculty capable of providing an LL B degree or equivalent qualification should be established as soon as possible.   • The Attorney-General should facilitate constructive dialogue between the legal profession and the government with a view to lifting the current atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust which exists between the profession and the government. The government must ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.   • The government is urged to repeal the non-bailable offences legislation and the amendment to the Criminal Code extending the definition of libel. The government is also urged to ensure that all prisoners and detainees are treated in accordance with constitutional and international due process guarantees and safeguards against torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

Charlie trial adjourned again

Things move slowly in the Gambia.  That is with the exception of the country’s move to arrest Charlie after inviting him to return there.  Charlie’s case has had several false starts.  Today the scheduled hearing was adjourned after a senior judge in the country died.  Last week the hearing didn’t progress further than legal wrangling over who can receive legal documents.  The upshot for Charlie is that he’s being treated extremely poorly.  He still has no idea what lies behind the “case” against him,  particularly as the prosecution has not fulfilled the court’s request to provide any detail of this.  This makes it impossible to prepare a defence.

Charlie is passing his time as well as he can.  He’s been away from his family and friends for over three months now and just wants to get home.  It is inhumane to treat someone in this way and Gambia should be ashamed of this whole affair.

This is Plymouth reports that Charlie is receiving diplomatic help

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=133188&command=displayContent&sourceNode=133171&contentPK=20324127&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch

This is Cornwall reports on Charlie’s situation

http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=144125&command=displayContent&sourceNode=232510&home=yes&more_nodeId1=232470&contentPK=20343574

UPDATE: 3rd April 2008

For those of you wondering what the latest is, I’m sorry to tell you that the situation is unchanged. Charlie is still in the Gambia with no passport and no ability to return to his family and friends. He is as upbeat as anyone could be in the circumstances and is grateful to everyone who has sent messages of support. Please keep them coming!

Charlie will be back in court on Monday.  We are at this stage unsure whether this will be for the beginning of the trial, as we have had no information from the prosecution.  Charlie’s lawyers have still received nothing from the prosecution which would allow them to prepare a defence.  It is a strange legal system that doesn’t tell you why you are accused and the “evidence” against you until it is heard in court.

Redorbit.com – Miner Doubts Chances of Fair Trial in the Gambia

Wednesday, 26 March 2008

By Lyn Barton Mining engineer Charlie Northfield fears he will not get a fair trial when he faces a Gambian court on charges of illegally mining uranium. The Plymouth-born father-of-three stands trial on April 7 alongside his employers, British mining firm Carnegie Minerals. He is denying the charges and has claimed that the Gambian authorities have “no evidence” against him. But he said: “I feel that I have little chance of a fair trial. “I have no idea how long the court case will take. The prosecution lawyers have yet to produce any witness statements or evidence to support the ludicrous charges against me. “The police had no evidence, but I was still charged on four counts of economic crimes.”Mr Northfield, 48, was arrested on February 12 and held at the police HQ in the Gambian capital of Banjul for three days before being charged with three counts of economic charges and one count of theft. He then spent ten days in the notorious Mile 2 prison – where he was not even allowed to speak to his wife – before being released on bail of US450,000. His passport was confiscated and he is unable to leave the African country. Mr Northfield said friends in Gambia have been supporting him and that he is living in a hotel and trying to enjoy some outdoor pursuits. He said: “The hotel is popular with British tourists and there is a steady stream of new arrivals from the UK, with more than a few from the Westcountry taking advantage of the flight from Bristol Airport. “I am in good health and getting a bit of exercise. I have been trying to keep myself busy by engaging in some outside activities, boating, fishing and sightseeing.”The former Plymouth College of Further Education student, whose mother and siblings still live in the city, thanked Plymothians for their good wishes. He said: “I would like to thank everyone for providing continued support for my family in Plymouth and for the daily words of comfort to my mother, brother, sisters and all of their families. “I have been amazed by the number of people showing their concern for my livelihood.”Mr Northfield’s work has taken him abroad and he has lived in Thailand for the past five years, with his wife Nueng and children Charles, 18, Thomas, 11, and Natalie, seven. His family back home has set up an Internet blog and there is a Facebook page dedicated to him, too. He said: “I have been humbled by the response of friends from all corners of the globe, friends that I have worked with in different mining operations around the world, friends that I studied with at Camborne School of Mines, friends from my teenage years and even friends from my primary school. “I hope I will have the opportunity to thank you all personally in the not too distant future.”He said he was extremely grateful for the support given to his wife in Thailand. “Nueng has had a torrid time from the day I was arrested,” he said. “She has been amazingly strong in maintaining her poise and looking after our children in the most difficult of circumstances. “I was not allowed to speak to my wife from prison, but since my release on bail I have spoken to her on a daily basis. “Nueng has been granted a visa to enter the UK and is hoping to visit Gambia next month after staying with my family in Plymouth.”Carnegie Minerals has been operating in Gambia since 1999, digging mineral sands which are sent to China for use in construction. But in January, the firm suspended its activities after the Gambian government began a probe into its operations. The workers decamped to neighbouring Senegal, but returned when mining resumed in February. The firm, and Mr Northfield, were then accused of commercially mining titanium, iron ore and uranium and the company’s mining licence was cancelled by the Gambian government. Commodity speculation is thought to have pushed the price of uranium up from 7 per lb in 2000 to more than 100 today. Carnegie Minerals “strongly refutes” the charges brought against it and Mr Northfield. It has stressed that titanium and iron oxide is a component of mineral sands and uranium is a trace element and cannot be economically extracted, and therefore has no commercial value.

Charlie’s Easter Message: Thanks for all your support

I would like to thank everyone for providing continued support for my family in Plymouth and for the daily words of comfort to my mother, brother, sisters and all of their families. I have been amazed by the number of people showing their concern for my livelihood.

I have been humbled by the response of friends from all corners of the globe, friends that I have worked with in different mining operations around the world, friends that I studied with at Camborne School of Mines, friends from my teenage years and even friends from my primary school. I hope that I will have the opportunity to thank you all personally in the not too distant future.

I am extremely grateful for the support given by my friends to my wife in Thailand. Nueng has had a torrid time from the day that I was arrested. She has been amazingly strong in maintaining her poise and looking after our children in the most difficult of circumstances. I was not allowed to speak to my wife from prison but since my release on bail I have spoken to her on a daily basis. Nueng has been granted a visa to enter the UK and is hoping to visit The Gambia next month after staying with my family in Plymouth.

I have been well supported by my friends in The Gambia. I am currently staying in a hotel while waiting for each court appearance. The hotel is popular with British tourists and there is a steady stream of new arrivals from the UK, with more than a few from the Westcountry taking advantage of the flight from Bristol Airport. I am in good health and getting a bit of exercise. I have been trying to keep myself busy by engaging in some outside activities, boating, fishing and sightseeing.

My next court appearance is set for 1100 hours, Monday 07 April. I have no idea how long the court case will take. The prosecution lawyers have yet to produce any witness statements or evidence to support the ludicrous charges against me. The police had no evidence but I was still charged on four counts of economic crimes. I feel that I have little chance of a fair trial.

 

Background Info – what happened when

For all of you who want to know how this situation evolved, we’ve put together this timeline.

Dec 2005	Agreement between Carnegie Minerals (Gambia) Ltd and the Government of Gambia.  Issuing of its mining licence.
19th July 2007	Official opening ceremony at Sanyang mine site attended by the Vice President of Gambia.
26th Oct 2007	Charlie joins the company.
10th Jan 2008	Gambian Government President announces the discovery of strategic minerals such as uranium and silicon in Gambia.
15th Jan	Carnegie receives a letter from the Geological Dept of the Office of the President of Gambia requesting that the company stops operations immediately and provides information.
16th Jan	Carnegie provides information and issues RNS stating that it has complied in full.
18th Jan	Carnegie provides further information.  Later it receives a second letter from the Geological Dept demanding more information.
21st Jan	Carnegie responds again and begins withdrawal of staff.
24th Jan	Carnegie completes withdrawal of staff.
4th Feb	Carnegie CEO Alan Hopkins meets the Gambian Attorney-General and Secretary-General for lunch in London.  They request the company returns and recommences operations.  They provide assurances about the safety of staff who return
8th Feb	Charlie flies back.
12th Feb	Charlie is arrested and questioned by the police.  Carnegie’s licence is revoked.  Charlie is detained at the police station.
15th Feb	Gambian Ministers hold press conference to announce that the licence has been revoked and Carnegie’s “MD” arrested. Charlie appears in court and is charged with three counts of “economic crime” and one of theft.  He is taken to Mile 2 prison outside Banjul where he is placed in a cell with six others.
21st Feb	Charlie appears in court again for the “start of his trial”.  His lawyers request a change in his bail conditions in order to free him.  The Government had requested that, in addition to US$250,000 in cash, the bail must include two properties owned by Gambian nationals to a value of US$100,000 each.  This is changed to USD 450,000 cash.
22nd Feb	Charlie is released on bail after ten days in jail and following the payment of USD 450,000 in cash.
25th March	Bail Review – Judge reserved decision until March 3rd
3rd March	A further court appearance is held.  Charlie’s trial is adjourned to the 17th March.

 

The Herald comments on the blog and Facebook

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=181429&command=displayContent&sourceNode=229968&home=yes&more_nodeId1=133174&contentPK=20076926