Former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa, has sharply criticized the prosecution in the ongoing Capitol Building arson case, labeling the evidence against him and four sitting lawmakers as speculative, circumstantial, and politically motivated.
The Monrovia City Court is expected to rule in the coming weeks on a motion to dismiss the high-profile case, which stems from the December 18, 2024 fire that ravaged the Capitol Building, Liberia’s legislative headquarters, during a period of intense political unrest.
In remarks to journalists following a recent hearing, Cllr. Koffa lambasted the state’s case as lacking legal merit and driven by an attempt to silence political dissent.
“If it doesn’t make sense, it’s probably not legal,” Koffa declared. “They say they found plastic cuffs and gasoline containers, but not at the crime scene. They found them somewhere outside the Capitol’s vicinity. That doesn’t prove anything. It proves desperation.”
Koffa, who was ousted as Speaker just days before the fire, questioned why no law enforcement officers had been implicated despite the police reportedly having full control of the Capitol at the time of the incident. “You will be unable to avoid a trial of this matter without bringing the police in as co-conspirators, if indeed an accident occurred,” he stated.
Prosecution Evidence Under Scrutiny
The prosecution’s case hinges largely on forensic and digital evidence. Central to their argument is a staff group chat allegedly linked to Koffa’s office, in which a staff member purportedly discussed retrieving a suspect’s phone from police custody, allegedly to prevent investigators from viewing potentially incriminating messages.
Defense lawyers, however, argue that the messages cited are hearsay and do not directly implicate any of the accused. “No physical link has been established. No motive has been convincingly outlined,” said one defense attorney. “What we’re seeing is not justice. It’s a judicial ambush.”
Koffa also dismissed the state’s use of audio recordings, some said to place him at the President’s residence before the fire, as “a hodgepodge of unrelated recordings being twisted to fit a weak narrative.”
“Being at the President’s house is now a crime?” he asked. “The Legislature was tense at the time, yes. But tension is not evidence. Gossip is not guilt.”
Prosecution Cites Forensics and Pre-Planning
In contrast, the prosecution has presented what it claims is hard evidence of a coordinated attack.
Deputy Police Commissioner Alvin James testified that forensic analysis of a chlorax bottle recovered near the scene confirmed the presence of gasoline, believed to have been used in the fire. He said the bottle, along with other artifacts, was critical in linking the suspects to the incident.
James also testified that meetings were held prior to the fire at Invincible Park and PHP Park, allegedly involving the defendants, where plans to burn the Capitol were reportedly discussed.
The prosecution’s first witness, Inspector ACP Rafell T. Wilson, told the court that police had uncovered messages between two of the defendants, Thomas Isaac Etheridge and Eric Susay, allegedly discussing the planned arson.
Wilson added that police responded swiftly to the fire and detained Etheridge and others who had been present at work prior to the incident.
Political Context Fuels Suspicion
The arson case unfolds against the backdrop of mounting political turmoil. Koffa’s removal from the Speakership sparked a wave of protests in Monrovia, with demonstrators accusing President Joseph Boakai of orchestrating a political witch hunt. The protests, which were met with police tear gas and dozens of arrests, called for Boakai’s resignation and decried alleged executive overreach.
President Boakai condemned the Capitol fire as a “wanton destruction” of national heritage, while critics now question whether the case is an attempt to neutralize prominent opposition voices.
With the court’s ruling on the dismissal motion pending, the case continues to draw national attention, raising serious questions about the independence of the judiciary, the integrity of the investigation, and the state of Liberia’s fragile democracy.
Source: FrontPage Africa
