According to him, Blyden Jenkins- Johnston (may his gentle soul rest in perfect peace and may light perpetual shine on him always), Sam-sumana’s lead counsel then, originated his case from Sections 124 and 127 of the Sierra Leone Constitution which were the wrong Sections which therefore made his case a non starter.
He said when the Comment newspaper called his attention to it on the very day he filed his papers, he promised amending when the matter went to full trial but he never did.
Another major blunder Pastor Sesay went on, was that from the beginning of the trial to the end of it, the APC Constitution never formed part of Sam-sumana’s bundle which means that it could not be referred to at all throughout the trial.
He said this was not a COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION or a KANGAROO COURT where it could have been assumed that APC never allowed for Sam Sumana to appeal his expulsion as provided for in its own Constitution whereas in the COMPETENT COURT OF JUSTICE, assumptions are not allowed. Videre est celere!
“As far as the five honourable judges were concerned, an APC Constitution never existed before them since it was never filed by the Sam-sumana side. And it was not for them to bind the lawyers of Sam-sumana to force them to file it.
At one stage during the trial, government lead counsel, Berthan Macauley Esq. appealed to the court for time to amend his statement of case. The five judges in their wisdom, agreed by granting a whole fortnight for that but they said that both sides must amend. That was then the opportunity for Blyden Jenkins-Johnston to file the APC Constitution but he never did again for reasons which he only knew before his death.
So it is clearly evident that Sam-sumana’s case was a non starter from the beginning. If the court could not establish what actually triggered Sam’s expulsion from the party which triggered Sam’s eventual sacking, what else could it establish?” Turn to page 7 of this edition and read more on this.