4 Perhaps it is important to state that at the close of the trial both sides were given the opportunity to address. While the State waived its right to do so, the defense briefly addressed me orally. In his oral submissions, Mr. K Sayang of learned Counsel for the defence has urged me to discharge and acquit the accused person because according to him, there is no direct evidence apart from the oral evidence of PW2 and PW3 linking the accused and the offences under charge. He submitted further that for the medical reports of PW2 and PW3 to be relevant they ought to have been conducted a long time ago. Learned Counsel for the defence who did not address me on the charges touching on seduction and indecent acts by a tourist, simply framed the issues for determination as follows: (a) Whether the accused had sexual intercourse with PW2 and PW3. (b) Whether he did so without their consent. I will prefer to first deal with Counts V and VI in which the accused is charged with indecent acts by a tourist. The Gambia Tourism Authority Act (Cap 32:06) Revised Laws of The Gambia 2009 defines a tourist as a visitor in The Gambia for a period of more than 24 hours for holiday, leisure, conference, religion, sports, health, business or any similar purpose. From exhibit “A”, it is clear that the accused is not a tourist but a resident farmer with his own house at Titinto village. The charges under the Tourism Offences Act are in my view not properly brought, and I will not border myself to deal with them. I will accordingly strike down the charges under Counts V and VI.