Chief Justice. The allegation made that one Vitalis Legunju was also a nephew of the trial judge, the Court finds relevant to the issue of controversy. In determining whether there is a legitimate reason to fear that the Judge lacked independence or impartiality, it is important to ascertain the standpoint of the accused and whether his doubts can be held to be objectively justified. In GABRIEL INYANG & ANOR V. FRN (2018), the court stated that: “For the applicants to succeed in an application for a violation of their right to fair trial, (…) it must be shown that the trial was in breach of international standard”. The Plaintiff maintained that he objected to the determination of his fate by the trial Judge vide an application which he annexed as evidence before the Court. The trial Judge however failed to recuse himself and stated that the Plaintiff has not disclosed any reasonable ground to warrant a recusal. The Defendant on the other hand argued that the Plaintiff did not disclose any fact that will warrant the trial Judge to be seen to have breached any Section of the Judges Supplementary Code of Conduct Act Cap 7:09 of the laws of The Gambia particularly Section 5 which basically provides the duty of a judge to be impartial and fair in the exercise of his judicial duties by according every person a right to be heard. The Defendant concluded that the allegations made by the Plaintiff are mere speculations. The right to be heard guaranteed under Article 7 of the African Charter provides as follows: “Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: 22