The case involving former Speaker of the House of Representatives J. Fonati Koffa and three other lawmakers, who are facing prosecution for an arson attack on the Capitol Building, has taken a different turn. Both defense and prosecuting attorneys expressed their objections to a ruling made by Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie on Tuesday, June 19, 2025, at Criminal Court “A” in the Temple of Justice, Monrovia.
Judge Willie ordered both parties to return to the Monrovia City Court for Magistrate Ben Barco to review the bail bond, which state lawyers deemed insufficient for the four defendants. The judge addressed two key issues: whether a bail bond filed with a Magisterial Court, which remains undetermined, can be heard by the Circuit Court for resolution. He explained that according to the law, a case submitted to a Magisterial Court holds specific jurisdiction, and the Circuit Court cannot intervene unless there is an appeal or a transfer process that is legally valid.
When questioned about the consequences for the party that did not request a Magistrate’s decision on the bail bond, Judge Willie noted that failure to do so could result in a waiver of rights and penalties due to the negligence of the Magistrate.
In his response to the second issue, Judge Willie indicated that the prosecution’s inaction effectively meant they waived their rights and the bail bond remains valid, directing that the case proceed without delay. He reiterated the legal principle that only the Magisterial Court has the specific jurisdiction over cases filed with it. The Circuit Court cannot consider matters that are not properly before it. Since the court proceedings were not the prosecution’s fault, the case will be sent back to the Magisterial Court to specifically address the bail bond exceptions and any objections.
Judge Willie instructed that Magistrate Barco should conduct a hearing regarding the bail bond exceptions between Friday, June 20, 2025, and Tuesday, June 24, 2025, and report the results back to Criminal Court “A.” He clarified that if state attorneys are dissatisfied with the outcome from the Magisterial Court, they have the right to challenge the bond in his court, but they cannot present exceptions that are not within his jurisdiction.
The judge then ordered Clerk of the Court J. Gabriel Smith to return the bail bond to the Monrovia City Court for a review of its sufficiency and to report back to him by Wednesday, June 25, 2025. During the call for exceptions to the bail, the defendants requested an application, which was granted by the judge. Since the Magistrate did not address the exceptions to the bail filed before him and instead forwarded the entire case, including the bail bond exceptions, to Criminal Court “A,” Judge Willie stated that the prosecution failed to act in a timely manner. They should have urged the Magistrate to hear the bail exceptions or brought the Magistrate to summary proceedings so that orders could be issued to address the bail bond exceptions.
Judge Willie recounted that on May 16, 2025, a writ of arrest was issued for defendants Dixon Seboe Abu Kamara, J. Fonati Koffa, Prescillia A. Cooper, and Jacob Debee. The bail bond exception was filed on June 12, 2025, before Magistrate L. Ben Barco. He mentioned that a motion to justify the surety and resistance to the defendants’ bail bond was also filed on June 13, 2025, before Magistrate Barco. After probable cause was established during the preliminary examination, the case was transferred to Criminal Court “A” on June 16, 2025, along with the bond documentation.
In their application to the court, Koffa and his co-defendants, through one of their lawyers, argued that Criminal Court “A” lacked jurisdiction to hear the exception to the bail bond, citing several reasons, including that the exception was filed before Magistrate Barco of the Monrovia City Magisterial Court.
Koffa’s lawyers requested that the court dismiss the jurisdiction over the bail bond exception and set it aside. The defendants’ six-count petition submitted to Judge Willie claimed that the records concerning the exceptions were filed and belonged in the jurisdiction of Magistrate Barco and were incorrectly included in the records transferred to Court “A.” The defense argued that since the Magistrate did not act on the exceptions filed by the state and instead referred the case file to Court “A,” the exceptions to the bail are moot and ineffective, meaning the defendants’ bond should be approved and the exceptions should be set aside.
