equally exonerated the Plaintiff. The said report has been annexed to his application as “ANNEXURE -5” The Plaintiff also maintained in his reply that the matter before the Court of Appeal was not in compliance with the Court of Appeal Rules as parties were not called to settle the records. The Plaintiff acknowledged that the ECOWAS Court is not a Court of Appeal to reopen and re-litigate the matter decided at the National Courts. The Plaintiff however maintained that the Defendant was given ample opportunity to deny the allegations against the trial judge during the trial of the Plaintiff but they refused to do so because the allegations were true. He further contends that one of the prosecuting Counsel withdrew from the case in the face of the injustice to which the records of proceedings, the ruling and judgment of the High Court clearly shows that Mr. Legenju Vitalis was prosecuting alone. That the Defendant is only trying to mislead the Court in this regard. The Plaintiff insists that he was not accorded free and fair treatment during the trial. To this effect, letters of protest were sent by the American and the Nigerian Embassies to the Gambian Government. He also maintained that he was not allowed access to his Counsel while in Mile 2 prison. He also replied that the trial judge fled the Gambia as a result of the discovery of not having the requisite qualification and the alleged corruption charges and has since been declared wanted by the Government of the Gambia. The Plaintiff denied being among those that were granted mass pardon, but was granted pardon on the pressure from both the Nigerian and United States’ Governments. 10