Preface

138
subsisting marriage between me and the respondent when the children were born
(Adama and Hawa)
The panel puts it to the appellant that the lower court legalized the two
children – and the appellant said she did not talk about the legality of children/
moreover in the lower court – Brikama Cadi Court they only asked me on what
Baba said. The panel drew the attention of the appellant on the issue of marriage
where on p3 the appellant said Fatou was born four months after her marriage with
Baba and the lower court proceeding on the same page 3 four lines before last of
the Brikama court proceeding. The appellant also said:
“…This is the way I entered Islam before we get married….”
On Ground 4- we asked the appellant to tell us what the Quran said about
custody of children and she answered that the children are 2 years old; they should
be 7 before they are taken away by their father.
On ground 5, we asked the appellant if she were taking full care of the
children why were the children taken to church and given pork to eat? The
appellant said that there was no body in the house to look after them. As for eating
pork I am not aware they ate.
On ground 6 we asked the appellant about the maintenance of the children
she said, before the respondent takes the children he should pay for their
maintenance for seven and a half months.
On ground 7 where the appellant to direct the respondent to locate the
children where she can see them easily; we asked the appellant whether she was
conceding for the respondent to assume the right of custody; where she said she
was complying with the lower court order that the children should be accessible
like in Bonton. Jarra Soma is far away. We finally put it to the appellant whether