Africell’s IT Manager Presents Phone History Of Coup Suspects!!!!

Defense Expressed Concern Over Privacy Invasion Issues

By Staff Reporter Fatou Cham, Banjul

After much delay due to unsettled documents intended for the state’s evidence, the treason trial proceeded yesterday amid growing tensions. Defense lawyers in their bid to probe the eleventh state witness faced intervention by the presiding judge, who remarked that the lawyers wereasking unnecessary questions, thus wasting the court’s time. This came after the Director of Public Prosecution successfully tendered the said documents, which included printouts of telephone call history, allegedly by the accused persons and some witnesses.

               Witness’s testimony

Mr. Hussein Mohammed Diab-Ghanen, Africell’s IT and Billing Manager, who appeared as the eleventh state witness said they facilitated the print-outs of ten of their subscribers, following a request made by the National Intelligence Agency and the DPP.

Mr.  Hussein said this process is done under rare circumstances regarding prepaid subscribers, either a request from NIA or police, whilst call history for post-paid subscribers are provided to them monthly.

He said the information is fed into a system called Mobile Suiting Centre, as the subscriber make or receive calls. The system, he added is free of human intervention and printout of call history made by Africell must bear Africell’s signature.

              Cross examination

After the witness’s brief testimony, one of the defense lawyers, Tambedou, started the cross-examination. In response to Tambedou’s question, Africell’s IT Manager said he also provided CD copy of the call history of the said subscribers’ numbers, in addition to document printouts. He said no editing can be made on the CD except, a copied one, and was quick to add that the one given to the NIA was copied.

Regarding  the numbers they were asked to retrieve their call history, said he did not know the owners, but was told that one belong to Ebrima Marreh, the first witness, and he overheard that the other belong to Kawsu Camara, one of the accused persons.

Mr. Hussein confirmed that the number that allegedly belongs to Kawsu Camara did not make call to that of Ebrima Marreh, but the latter’s call history indicate that he called the former’s in November 2009 and the call lasted for 14 seconds.

During another cross-examination session by Awa Sissay-Sabally, another defense lawyer, Mr. Hussein confirmed that the subscriber number 7750333 is a post-paid.

Mr. Hussein maintained that making printout of call history of subscribers is made only upon request by NIA or police and not ordinary people, despite owing a duty of confidentially to their clients.

 When asked how safe is their subscribers knowing their call history can be retrieved as such, he said their subscribers are very safe.

                     Tensed

As Lawyer continued to refer the witness to the documents to figure-out the alleged transactions between the accused persons and Ebrima Marreh, the presiding Judge intervened.

Justice Amadi refused to entertain further questions on the said documents on the grounds that the lawyer could make an address to the court, during which he can bring into light whether or not there were transactions as alleged.

 “The prosecution said they wanted to show communication and networking, but what we are trying to show is that there was a one-way traffic of communication. Calls were coming only from Ebrima Marreh and not the accused persons,” Tambedou retorted.

Lawyer Secka also said since none of them is an expert it is prudent for the court to allow the witness to be questioned to clear doubts.

The case resumes Wednesday.