Published: July 3, 2025
MONROVIA — Former Speaker J. Fonati Koffa is tied to the Capitol Building arson case by just two strands: a suspect allegedly told another to head to his house after the blaze, and two of his staffers were in a chatroom that discussed deleting evidence. That’s the prosecution’s entire case against him, according to the indictment.
The sweeping 63-count indictment, filed by the Special Grand Jury for Montserrado County on June 16, charges Koffa alongside more than a dozen individuals with crimes including arson, criminal conspiracy, attempted murder, criminal solicitation and the release of destructive forces. But despite the severity of the charges and the political weight of Koffa’s name, the former House speaker’s alleged role in the destruction of Liberia’s Capitol is supported by little more than implication.
According to the indictment, “with the support and facilitation of Co-Defendants Dixon W. Seboe, J. Fonati Koffa, Abu B. Kamara, and Jacob C. Deebie,” the main suspects—Kivi Bah alias Kaba, Jerry Pokah alias Tyrese, John Nyanti, Christian Kofa, Thomas Isaac Etheridge and others—planned and executed the Dec. 18, 2024, attack that burned the joint chambers of the Capitol Building, causing nearly $3.8 million in damage. The phrase “support and facilitation” appears in nearly every count naming Koffa, yet the indictment never specifies what that support entailed.
A Thin Thread
The most direct reference to Koffa appears in Count Three, where prosecutors cite an audio recording between co-defendants Amos Kofa and Thomas Etheridge on the day of the fire. After confirming that the Capitol Building had been set ablaze, Etheridge allegedly instructed Amos Kofa to go to “Hon. J. Fonati Koffa’s house,” located opposite former Vice President Jewel Howard Taylor’s residence in Congo Town.
The indictment also alleges that co-defendants Patience Bestman and Harrilyn Grace Johnson—“who are part of the social media chatroom of Co-Defendant J. Fonati Koffa’s office”—had knowledge of the planning and execution of the attack and “actively conspired to conceal evidence relating thereto contained on Co-Defendant Thomas Isaac Etheridge’s phone.”
While the prosecution uses the chatroom association to tie Koffa to the broader conspiracy, it does not claim that he participated in the conversation, was aware of the messages exchanged, or gave any directive related to evidence deletion.
No Acts, No Orders, No Words
Unlike other defendants, Koffa is not linked to any specific act—he didn’t supply gasoline, deliver instructions or appear in any of the numerous audio recordings cited in the indictment.
For example, co-defendant Eric Susay was allegedly recorded on the night of Dec. 17 saying, “we dirty the police officer (Sgt. Amara Bility), and left him lying on the street, and have taken his service weapon away and gave it to former EPS officers.” Another recording features suspects discussing plans to “use tear gas and chlorine in the joint chambers to dislodge lawmakers from the majority bloc not to have access to the joint chamber for session.”
Koffa’s name never surfaces in any of those conversations.
Still, the government insists that he, along with a small group of lawmakers and operatives, played an enabling role. In multiple counts, the indictment repeats: “with the support and facilitation of Co-Defendants Dixon W. Seboe, J. Fonati Koffa…”—but never explains how that facilitation occurred.
Under Liberian law, criminal facilitation and conspiracy require more than proximity. The Penal Code mandates that a conspirator must agree to the commission of a crime, and at least one party must commit an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. A facilitator must knowingly provide aid that materially assists the crime.
Legal analysts argue that the prosecution’s language falls short.
“This is not a case where we see phone logs, transactions or meetings directly involving Hon. Koffa,” said a Monrovia-based attorney not affiliated with the case. “Proximity to perpetrators and employment of staff involved in separate conduct is not, in itself, sufficient to prove criminal responsibility.”
A Political Undercurrent?
At the time of the fire, there was a brewing effort to unseat Koffa as speaker by a faction of lawmakers aligned with the ruling Unity Party. The attack on the Capitol came just weeks after the Supreme Court ruled that the actions of those lawmakers seeking his removal were ultra vires.
The indictment alleges that the perpetrators not only intended to destroy public property, but also to prevent pro-Boakai lawmakers from accessing the joint chambers by using fire, petrol bombs and chemical agents.
According to the prosecution, the attack was calculated to paralyze the legislative process and destabilize the leadership bloc that had taken control following Koffa’s ouster. Yet, Koffa is not placed at any of the meetings, nor is he recorded in any conversation about the planning or aftermath.
Koffa has not made a public statement, but legal insiders expect his defense team to file a motion to dismiss or request severance, arguing that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the charges.
Discussion about this post