Service Commission after investigations and due deliberations pursuant to the petition. The Defendant vehemently opposed the Plaintiff’s assertion that the President receives and announces outcomes of police investigations and further stated that, on the contrary criminal investigation reports are forwarded to the office of the Director, Public Prosecution at the Attorney General’s Chamber for legal advice and further actions as may be necessary. The Defendant therefore maintained that the Plaintiff was properly charged based on the outcome of the investigation report submitted to the Attorney Generals Chambers by the police, the legal opinions and surrounding facts. According to the Defendant, the said investigations, only offered a limited reprieve for the Plaintiff’s actions in referring the matter to the Gambian National Intelligence Agency, and did not commend or clear the Plaintiff of any wrong doing. The Defendant again stated that the investigation reports are not conclusive in the sense that final decision to bring charges or not rests with the Director of Public Prosecution. The Defendant denied that the trial judge in his case had any corruption case before or during the trial of the Plaintiff and that primarily informed the refusal of his application requesting the trial judge to recuse himself from the trial since the facts deposed to in the affidavit disclosed no grounds to warrant granting the application. The Defendant further submitted that it did not file an affidavit in opposition to the appeal at the Supreme Court because the allegations were targeted at the trial Judge. 7