Jury selection in the high profile arson trial of former Liberian House Speaker J. Fonati Koffa and 14 co-defendants stretched into its third day Wednesday as repeated no-shows by prospective jurors prompted contempt citations and prison sentences.
Criminal Court A managed to select four additional jurors on Wednesday, November 19, bringing the total to 11 from seven chosen on Tuesday. The court remains short of the required 15 member panel, which includes 12 regular jurors and three alternates.
Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie ordered two absentees remanded to Monrovia Central Prison for 14 days for contempt of court. He directed three other absentees to appear Thursday to show cause why they should not be held in contempt. The judge described their absence as direct obstruction of court proceedings that resulted in delays and undermined the judicial process.
The defendants appeared before Criminal Court A on Monday, November 17, where they were formally presented with indictments tied to the alleged arson attack on the Capitol Building and all entered not guilty pleas. The case stems from a December 18, 2024 fire that devastated critical parts of the Legislature’s working infrastructure, including document archives, committee offices and essential administrative equipment.
Charges include criminal mischief, conspiracy, solicitation, intent to commit murder, aggravated assault, illegal possession of a firearm, release of destructive forces, reckless endangerment and theft of property. Prosecutors argue that the group played a direct role in the alleged attack, while defense lawyers maintain that none of the defendants were involved.
Dozens of prospective jurors were rejected by both prosecution and defense on Tuesday, with many deemed to have demonstrated signs of bias. Court officials indicated that lawyers on both sides concluded their inclusion could jeopardize the trial’s fairness. Notably, several jurors reported familiarity with Representative Dixon Seboe, one of the defendants.
The jury selection process has been slowed by both absenteeism and a series of rejections on both sides. Peremptory dismissals by the defense and dismissals by prosecutors due to connections or familiarity with defendants have complicated efforts to empanel an impartial jury in the politically sensitive case.
Prosecutors allege that Former Speaker Koffa played a direct role in planning or facilitating the attack through a WhatsApp chatroom connected to his office. State witness Peter W. Johnson, Chief Inspector for Criminal Investigation, testified during preliminary hearings that Koffa was referred to as “Higher Up” or “Boss Man” by co-defendant Thomas Ethridge in messages allegedly retrieved during investigations.
Johnson claimed that Ethridge told investigators he received $1,000 to distribute among those who carried out the attack, money allegedly provided by Koffa. The prosecution also presented audio recordings allegedly obtained from Ethridge that captured voices of multiple defendants discussing the plot.
Defense counsel has argued that the indictment and proceedings lack neutrality and may be politically motivated. The defense team sought a writ of certiorari in an effort to overturn Judge Willie’s denial of their motion to suppress certain evidence, arguing that admission of evidence allegedly obtained through illegal search and seizure, unauthorized analysis and coerced confessions would violate constitutional protections.
On October 8, Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard-Wolokolie of the Supreme Court denied the defense’s petition for a writ of certiorari and directed Judge Willie to resume immediate jurisdiction over the case, thereby lifting a stay order that had paused proceedings. The ruling dismissed the defense’s request to suppress key evidence and signaled the court’s intent to move the case forward without further procedural delays.
The defense reacted strongly to the Supreme Court’s ruling, expressing disappointment and alleging that the refusal to suppress certain evidence amounted to an implicit endorsement of torture within the Liberian justice system. They argued that by allowing allegedly coerced confessions and contested evidence to be admitted, the court was effectively sanctioning practices that violate fundamental rights.
Among the defendants are Representatives Abu B. Kamara and Jacob Debee, along with several individuals identified as aides and associates. The indictment resulted from a true bill issued on June 16 by a special grand jury of Montserrado County.
The Capitol fire sparked fierce debate in Liberia, with accusations that the attack was orchestrated to impede legislative operations during a period of political tension. The incident destroyed critical legislative infrastructure and raised questions about security at the Capitol Building.
The ongoing delays and repeated absences highlight systemic strains within Liberia’s jury management process. Legal analysts warn that protracted delays risk public confidence in the judiciary’s ability to conduct high profile trials fairly and efficiently.
Judge Willie announced that prospective jurors would be assembled Thursday, November 20, to ensure completion of the panel. The judge’s assertive stance, including jail sentences for absent jurors, underscores the strain the case continues to place on the country’s judicial system.
The case has drawn significant public attention given Koffa’s prominence as former House Speaker and the involvement of sitting lawmakers. The seven jurors successfully selected on Tuesday were sequestered in the basement of the Temple of Justice, where they will remain while selection of the remaining jurors and alternates continues.
Unconfirmed reports suggest the lawmakers may seek a change of venue due to alleged dissatisfaction with Judge Willie, though no formal motion has been filed. The defense has consistently maintained that their clients had no involvement in the Capitol fire and that the prosecution’s case relies on questionable evidence.
During preliminary hearings, prosecutors presented two witnesses from the Liberia National Police Crime Services Investigation Department but had difficulty authenticating social media evidence that formed the core of their case. Despite evidentiary concerns, the magistrate determined that prosecution had met the minimum standard to move the case to trial, leading to defense objections and subsequent legal maneuvers that briefly took the matter to the Supreme Court.
The case represents one of the most significant criminal prosecutions in recent Liberian history, involving allegations against prominent political figures and raising questions about legislative security, political violence and the functioning of democratic institutions.
Prosecution is expected to begin producing witnesses once jury selection concludes and the trial formally commences. The length and complexity of the proceedings remain uncertain given the multiple defendants, extensive evidence claims and ongoing procedural challenges.
Source: newsghana.com.gh
