Monrovia, Liberia – The Monrovia Metropolis Court docket is about to rule within the coming weeks on a movement to dismiss the arson case involving former Home Speaker Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa and 4 sitting lawmakers.
By: Willie N. Tokpah, [email protected]
The case stems from the December 18, 2024 fireplace that severely broken the Capitol Constructing, the seat of Liberia’s legislature. As preliminary hearings proceed, the protection has mounted a vigorous problem, labeling the prosecution’s proof as speculative and politically motivated.
On the heart of the protection’s argument is the assertion that the prosecution’s case is constructed on circumstantial proof and rumour fairly than concrete details. Cllr. Koffa, addressing the media following a current court docket session, said, “If it doesn’t make sense, it’s most likely not authorized.”
He emphasised that the police had management over the Capitol Constructing on the time of the fireplace, questioning why no legislation enforcement officers have been implicated within the incident.
The prosecution’s key piece of proof is an alleged digital employees chat room linked to Koffa’s workplace, the place messages had been purportedly exchanged following the fireplace. One employees member allegedly posted about retrieving a suspect’s cellphone from the police station to stop investigators from accessing potential messages associated to the blaze. Nonetheless, the protection contends that these allegations are speculative and inadequate to help prison prices.
The protection additional argues that no direct messages have been introduced, no bodily hyperlink has been established, and no clear motive has been convincingly outlined for why sitting lawmakers, together with a former Speaker, would destroy the very establishment they swore to guard.
Cllr. Koffa questioned the credibility of the prosecution’s proof, stating, “They are saying they discovered plastic cuffs and gasoline containers, however not on the crime scene. They discovered them someplace exterior the Capitol’s neighborhood. That doesn’t show something. It proves desperation.”
He additionally criticized the state’s reliance on fragmented audio recordings, some purportedly inserting him on the President’s residence, as “a hodgepodge of unrelated recordings” being twisted to suit a weak narrative. “Being on the President’s home is now a criminal offense?” Cllr. Koffa requested rhetorically. “The Legislature was tense on the time, sure. However stress shouldn’t be proof. Gossip shouldn’t be guilt.”
Attorneys representing the accused, together with sitting lawmakers, have moved for a direct dismissal of the costs, arguing that no direct or bodily proof has been produced linking their shoppers to the crime. One protection lawyer remarked, “This case ought to by no means have made it this far. It’s a distraction, a smear marketing campaign, and an try and discredit robust political voices within the nation. What we’re seeing shouldn’t be justice. It’s a judicial ambush.”
If it doesn’t make sense, it’s most likely not authorized. There are a variety of issues that occur. First, the prosecution tried to keep away from the truth that the police was accountable for the dealing always. So, you may be unable to keep away from a trial of this matter, bringing the police in as co-conspirators, if certainly, an accident happens. The circumstance is, the state witness testified that the proof – the plastic cups and the stuff they used to move the gasoline, they are saying they pulled the proof exterior of the neighborhood. That doesn’t make sense. Lastly, it’s a hodgepodge of recordings, unrelated. – Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa, former Speaker, Home of Representatives
In distinction, the prosecution has introduced forensic proof to help its case. Deputy Commissioner of Police Alvin James testified that artifacts collected from the crime scene revealed that petroleum used to set the constructing ablaze was transported in a chlorax bottle. He said that forensic evaluation confirmed the presence of gasoline within the bottle.
Moreover, James testified that previous to the incident, conferences had been held by the defendants at Invincible Park and PHP Park, the place they allegedly agreed to set the Capitol Constructing on fireplace.
First witness Inspector ACP Rafell T. Wilson testified that his investigation charged the defendants after discovering communication between Thomas Isaac Etheridge and co-defendant Eric Susay in regards to the burning of the Capitol Constructing on December 18, 2024.
Wilson additionally testified that after the fireplace incident, the police and different legislation enforcement companies had been instantly deployed on the crime scene and rounded up a number of workers, together with Etheridge, who was at work earlier than the constructing was burnt.
The arson assault on the Capitol Constructing occurred amidst heightened political tensions, together with anti-government protests and the removing of Speaker Koffa from workplace. President Joseph Boakai condemned the act as “wanton destruction,” and police used tear gasoline to disperse crowds, arresting dozens of protesters. The protests adopted the removing of Speaker Koffa, an opposition determine accused of corruption. The demonstrators additionally demanded President Boakai’s resignation.
The timing of the costs in opposition to the lawmakers, a lot of whom have been important of govt overreach, has led political observers to query the motivations behind the prosecution.
