PHOTO: Some of the suspects at the court
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
TEMPLE OF JUSTICE, Monrovia–Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie on September 4,2025, denied defense lawyers’ request to have the Capitol Building arson trial televised.
According to Cllr. Arthur Johnson, the trial is a public interest and as such must be televised, so as to allow the public follow what is happening in the trial.
He stated that since we are in the 21st century where technology is leading everywhere, it will be necessary to have this particular case televised given the public nature which is filled with sentiments. The move is line with the Table Mountain Declaration and Freedom of Information Act, said Cllr. Johnson.
Cllr. Johnson accused the Supreme Court of allowing Journalists to live stream the famous case involving the “Majority Bloc” and “Minority Bloc” in the Bill of Information Petition but could not proof it by record.
“There’s nothing to hide and this will not prejudice the case against any party.”
This request is not made in bad faith but for the benefits of the public and prayed court to exercise its discretion, he said.
In resisting the motion, state prosecution vehemently requests to deny and dismiss the motion filed by the defense team.
Prosecution lead lawyer Cllr. Richard Scott Jr said, the defense motion is made in bad faith to the extent, it violates the general rules of court specifically, Rule 11.
Rule 11 of general rule of courts state Proceedings in court shall be conducted with fitting dignity and perfect decorum, the taking of photographs in the courtroom during sessions of the court or recess between sessions and the recording of live broadcast or televising of court proceedings are calculated to allow lawyers to grandstand, detract the witness in giving his testimony, degrade the court and create misconceptions with respect thereto in the mind of the public and hence shall not be permitted.
Cllr. Scott stated that the above rule of court prohibits the live televise of cases which the defense team is aware of but has to test the court intentionally.
State prosecutor Scott further that the general rules of courts were formulated since 1999 during the administration of former Chief Justice Gloria Musu Scott and if the defense team wants it changed, let them write the LNBA who is responsible for law reform or the National Legislature.
Cllr. Scott added that the motion is totally meant to misinform the court and the public. He further that the constitution, statutory laws and rules of court are instruction to all judges to be guided by law but to do what the defense team is requesting, it means the court will make it own law an authority they are not clothed with.
He prayed the court to warn the defense team under the principle of sub-Judice to refrain from deciding this case in the press rather than the court to which the press is not ban from the proceedings not attaining court records.
The defense lawyer therefore, asked court to fine the defense team for violating the rule of court and fine lawyers involved with sub-judice.
Meanwhile, Judge rejected the defense team request and referred them to rule 11 of the general rules of courts.