Published: May 19, 2026
MONROVIA — More than 17 months after a fire devastated Liberia’s Capitol Building, the criminal trial of former House Speaker Jonathan Fonati Koffa and 13 co-defendants remains on hold — halted by the Supreme Court, delayed by torture allegations, derailed by a disbanded jury, and entangled in a constitutional dispute that the nation’s highest court has yet to resolve.
The latest halt occurred on March 3, 2026, when Associate Justice Yussif D. Kaba issued an immediate stay of all proceedings in Criminal Court ‘A’ after defense attorneys filed a petition for a Writ of Prohibition, accusing presiding Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie of exceeding his judicial authority during jury selection. With that order, no witnesses can testify, no jury can be formed, and no substantive hearing can proceed.
It is the second time the Supreme Court has intervened. The first came in September 2025, when the High Court stayed the trial after Willie denied a defense motion to suppress evidence tied to allegations that several defendants were tortured in state custody. The pattern has now repeated itself, and the High Court has yet to issue a written merits decision after either intervention.
The fire broke out on Dec. 18, 2024, during a bitter political confrontation over whether Koffa had been lawfully removed from the speakership. The Liberia National Police later concluded the blaze was deliberately set. A parallel investigation by retired U.S. fire chiefs reached the same conclusion, though that report was ruled inadmissible at trial because its authors were not present in court to testify.
Charges against the defendants include arson, attempted murder, conspiracy, facilitation, solicitation, and reckless endangerment of others. A special grand jury for Montserrado County issued a formal indictment in July 2025, naming Koffa along with Representatives Dixon W. Seboe, Abu B. Kamara, and Jacob C. Debee, as well as civilian co-defendants such as Kivi Bah, Jerry Pokah, Stephen M. Broh, John Nyanti, Eric Susay, and Thomas Isaac Etheridge, among others.
The prosecution alleges that planning meetings took place at locations in Jallah Town, Invincible Park, and PHP Park. Key evidence cited includes a gasoline-soaked Clorox bottle allegedly recovered near the Joint Chamber, recorded telephone calls, a purported written confession by Kivi Bah, and the seizure of 72 mobile phones. Magistrate Ben Barco found that the evidence was sufficient at the preliminary examination stage in June 2025, ruling that the state had established probable cause to send the case to Criminal Court “A.”
Koffa and his lawyers have argued from the beginning that the prosecution is politically driven. They claim the state’s case relies on hearsay, circumstantial evidence, and speculative interpretations of chat-room activity, with no direct physical connection between the legislators and the fire’s ignition.
The torture allegations pose the greatest challenge to the prosecution’s case. In September 2025, medical examinations following Istanbul Protocol standards identified injuries in five defendants — Etheridge, Broh, Pokah, John Nyanti, and Eric Susay — described as highly consistent with torture, including scarring, chronic shoulder dislocation, and PTSD-like symptoms. Judge Willie denied a motion to suppress evidence derived from that treatment, leading to the first Supreme Court stay. Etheridge had previously appeared in Monrovia City Court in January 2025 alleging waterboarding and beatings and reportedly collapsed during the hearing.
The case entered its trial phase in November 2025 when the four lawmaker defendants entered not guilty pleas and jury selection began. On Jan. 2, 2026, Judge Willie disbanded the empaneled jury due to allegations of contamination by the prosecution, setting the case back. The prosecution then requested a venue change, citing intense publicity and concerns about the integrity of the jury pool in Montserrado County. That motion was still pending when the defense filed the prohibition petition, which triggered the current Supreme Court stay.
The High Court’s ruling will carry significant consequences either way. A decision favoring the defense could render portions of the lower court proceedings defective and force a reset. A denial would return the case immediately to Criminal Court ‘A’ for trial, though the torture suppression issue and evidentiary disputes would remain unresolved.
The Supreme Court has offered no public timetable for its ruling.
Discussion about this post