Supreme Court Justice Jameseetta Wolokollie has refused to grant a request from former House Speaker Fonati Koffa and others involved in an arson case. Their lawyers had asked the Supreme Court to force a lower court to accept their bail bond, which the lower court had rejected. The defense believes the judge made a mistake and wants the higher court to fix it.
The government, represented by lawyers from the Ministry of Justice, says the bond does not meet the legal rules for releasing someone before trial. But the defense argues that their bond is good and says the government’s objections are unfair and political. They believe keeping them in jail is against their rights under the law. The case will continue on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, in Criminal Court “A” with Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie.
The Supreme Court Chambers Justice on September 1, 2025, declined to issue the Writ of Certiorari prayed for by Thomas Etheridge and several defendants who are still behind bars after seven to eight months. Recently, in a significant ruling, Judge Willie denied bail to several defendants involved in the controversial Property Valuation Bond case.
Defendants Christian Koffa, John Nyanti, Eric Susay, Thomas Isaac Etheridge, Gabriel Fansieh, and Stephen Broh were ordered to remain in custody after the court found key documents presented in their defense to be “faked, fraudulent, and invalid.” The documents were reportedly deemed invalid by Mr. James Afif Jabar, Assistant Commissioner of the Liberia Revenue Authority’s Real Estate Tax Division.
However, the court noted that three defendants, Christian Koffa, Gabriel Fansieh, and Stephen Broh were not considered flight risks, leaving room for their release if their defense can legally validate the Property Valuation Bond by correcting the fraudulent transactions. Judge Willie’s ruling suspended further proceedings while emphasizing that the defendants can only be released if the necessary corrections are made to the bond documents.
This Supreme Court’s ruling marks a critical moment in the ongoing case, highlighting the court’s firm stance against fraudulent documentation and the seriousness with which it treats property-related offenses in Liberia. The case continues to draw public attention as legal experts await the next developments.
