AKI Trial: Judge Questions Defence Over Absent Witness and Procedural Irregularities
Victims wait outside Banjul High Court © Askanwi
By Fatoumata Jaiteh
The AKI trial continued on Wednesday, 12th November 2025, at Banjul High Court, where proceedings were marked by a tense exchange between the presiding judge, Justice Ebrima Jaiteh, and defense counsel Oket over the absence of an additional witness the defense had previously indicated would testify.
At the start of the sitting, Justice Jaiteh queried Counsel Oket on the whereabouts of the supplementary defense witness expected to appear in court. Counsel Oket informed the court that the witness was unavailable, prompting the judge to question why the matter had been adjourned to that day if the witness was not ready to take the stand. Justice Jaiteh stressed that Defence Witness 2 (DW2) should have been present as planned.
The judge further noted that the defense had failed to file a formal application seeking leave to introduce a supplementary witness who was not part of the originally scheduled list of witnesses. Describing the move as procedurally irregular, he instructed court technicians to replay footage from previous proceedings. The recording confirmed that the defense had only made a verbal statement announcing its intention to bring in a new witness.
Justice Jaiteh emphasised that such a step required a formal written application supported by valid reasons. He warned that allowing informal additions to the witness list “may be perceived as an ambush trial,” which he said the court would not tolerate. “I am not going to entertain an application that is going to waste our time,” he added firmly.
With no formal application before the court, the defense committed to submitting the necessary documents by Tuesday, 18th November 2025.
The matter was consequently adjourned to Thursday, 27th November 2025, from 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. for the continuation of the cross-examination of DW2.
In the AKI trial, 27 bereaved parents pursue justice for the deaths of their children, allegedly caused by contaminated cough syrups. What began as isolated reports of unexplained kidney failure in 2022 evolved into one of the most significant public health legal challenges the country has ever faced, claiming the lives of over 70 children.
According to court filings, the parents argue that the tainted syrups imported and distributed locally were allowed into the country through a chain of regulatory failures. Their lawsuit accuses both state institutions and private pharmaceutical suppliers of negligence, citing what they say were preventable lapses in quality control, testing, and monitoring of imported medicines. The plaintiffs maintain that these failures enabled toxic substances to reach children who were prescribed the syrups for routine illnesses.
