By Yusufu S. Ban
The high-profile court martial trial of Major Patrick Abu Ordende Sesay, popularly known as PAO, and five other military personnel drew closer to a verdict last Friday as both the prosecution and defense teams delivered their closing arguments before the court martial board.
The accused are facing charges related to an alleged subversive plot that occurred between June and July 2023, with all six men jointly charged on eight counts, including mutiny, failure to suppress mutiny, and desertion.
Leading the prosecution, State Counsel Joseph A.K. Sesay emphasized the gravity of the charges, stating that the accused, all long-serving members of the Republic of Sierra Leone Armed Forces (RSLAF), had betrayed the state’s trust. Sesay informed the court that Major Sesay (1st accused) was no longer represented by counsel and was thus exempted from the closing addresses in accordance with legal procedures.
Sesay argued that the state had provided sufficient evidence linking the accused to the alleged mutiny, which he described as an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government or defy lawful authority within the RSLAF.
He urged the court martial board to deliver guilty verdicts if convinced by the evidence, but also reminded them of the legal principle that the state must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The prosecution presented several key pieces of evidence, including WhatsApp voice messages allegedly from the accused, which detailed plans to recruit more personnel, including a female lieutenant who would reportedly provide intelligence from RSLAF meetings. One message suggested coordination of efforts in Makeni and Kambia, with plans to recruit “die-hard APC soldiers” to support the subversion.
Sesay also pointed out that some of the accused fled to Guinea after the alleged plot was exposed, which he argued demonstrated their knowledge and involvement in the conspiracy.
In response, the defense team, led by Legal Aid Board lawyer Ibrahim Bangura, representing Major Juana Kabba (2nd accused) and Corporal Mohamed Koroma (6th accused), urged the court to carefully scrutinize the evidence. Bangura highlighted Kabba’s 17 years of unblemished military service and argued that the prosecution had failed to prove his involvement beyond a reasonable doubt.
Bangura claimed that Kabba’s decision to seek asylum in Guinea was a result of threats and trauma, not an indication of desertion. He also argued that Kabba’s forwarding of a document containing a list of weapons was not evidence of subversion, as he was unaware of its contents at the time.
Regarding Corporal Koroma, Bangura stated that his client had been coerced into making false statements during the investigation, without legal representation, and that some of the officers involved in this coercion were part of the prosecution team.
Lawyer J. Kobba, representing Captain Zainab Amara Suwu (5th accused), argued that the prosecution’s case against his client relied solely on circumstantial evidence, particularly her alleged romantic relationship with Major Sesay. Kobba maintained that no concrete evidence had been presented to prove Suwu’s involvement in any mutinous activities.
Major Sesay, representing himself, vehemently denied all charges, claiming that the evidence presented in court was fabricated to tarnish his reputation. He alleged that his phone had been confiscated in August 2023 and that his voice had been manipulated in the audio recordings presented as evidence.
Sesay argued that he had been discharged from the RSLAF in February 2024, making it impossible for him to be charged with desertion as a civilian. In an emotional plea, he accused the prosecution of orchestrating a smear campaign against him, naming Colonel M.B.S. Kamara and Captain Yainkain Kamara as key figures in this alleged conspiracy.
Other defense lawyers, including L.J. Kamara representing Major Foday Sumana Kamara (3rd accused) and Hassan Kamara representing Major Ibrahim Abu Bakarr Bangura (4th accused), echoed similar arguments, emphasizing the lack of credible evidence against their clients.
Judge Advocate Mark Ngegba concluded the session by informing the court that he would issue a 24-hour notice for his summing-up address before the board deliberates on the verdict.
