“To be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing; to be informed, if he does not have legal assistance, of this right; and to have legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he does not have sufficient means to pay for it”. The Constitution of the Respondent also guarantees the right to be defended by Counsel. Section 24 (3) of the Gambian Constitution provides that: “Every person who is charged with a criminal offence(a) shall be permitted to defend himself or herself before the court in person or, at his or her own expense, by a legal representative of his or her own choice;” The Applicants maintained that the Counsel representing them were compelled to withdraw their representation because the Court refused every application made on their behalf. That the presence of armed security personnel in and around the Court room during proceedings prevented their Counsel from consulting with them privately. That after Counsel withdrew their representation, the Court ordered that the Applicant defend themselves without giving them opportunity to engage another Counsel of their choice. Conversely, the Respondent argued that the Applicants were accorded the full guarantees of a fair trial and represented by Counsel of their choice until when counsel opted out and they elected to represent themselves. That the whole process was in conformity with the provisions of Article 7 of the Charter. The Court having analyzed the annexures to the Applicants’ initiating application, it is clear that the trial Court categorically asked the Applicants in clear terms if they were ready to enter their defense or if they wish to wait for their Counsel but they failed to answer. (See para 29 Exhibit B 10, Judgment of the High Court of the Gambia Suit No. HC/179/16/CR/060/AO). Prior to this, the Applicants were called upon to 28