PHOTO: Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard Wolokolie
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
TEMPLE OF JUSTICE, Monrovia-The Supreme Court of Liberia Justice presiding in Chambers Jamesetta Howard Wolokolie has mandated Criminal Court ‘A’ Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie to proceed with the Capitol Building arson trial in keeping with law, after she declined to issue the writ of mandamus prayed for by defendant Thomas Etheridge and five others.
Defendants Christian Kofa, John Nyanti, Eric Suray, Thomas Isaac Etheridge, and Stephen Broh through their legal team filed a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court after they were denied bond by the Criminal Court in a motion prosecution exception to defendants’ bail bond.
Defendant Thomas Etheridge and five others are held in pre-trial detention for the alleged crime of Arson, Criminal mischief, Criminal conspiracy, Criminal solicitation, Criminal Intent to commit murder, Aggravated Assault, Illegal possession of firm arm, Release of destructive Forces, Recklessly endangering another Person & Theft of property.
The mandate reads, By directive of Her Honor Jameseta H. Wolokolie, Associate Justice presiding in Chambers, you are hereby mandated to resume jurisdiction, and proceed in keeping with law, as the Justice has declined to issue the writ prayed for.
PETITIONERS’ PETITION
Petitioners in the above entitled cause of action respectfully pray Your Honor for the issuance of the Alternative Writ of Certiorari correcting and reversing the Rulings and actions of the Co-Respondent Judge, Roosevelt Z. Willie, Resident Circuit Judge of Criminal Court “A” for keeping the Petitioners in detention pending the hearing and determination of the Exceptions filed by the Prosecution to the Defendants’ Bail Bond after the said Judge had earlier approved the Defendants Criminal Appearance Bond, and for other erroneous Rulings and actions set forth herein below for the following legal and factual reasons, to wit:
- The Petitioners say they are the Movants and the Co-Respondent herein, the Republic of Liberia is aiso the Respondent in the Motion to Justify Surety and also the Petitioners are the Defendants and the Co-Respondent herein, the Republic of Liberia is the Plaintiff in the main suit out of which this Petition and the Motion grow. Also, the Co- Respondent Judge is the presiding Judge in the Trial Court before whom the present case is pending trial.
- That Petitioners submit and aver that they were variously arrested by the Liberia National Police, charged with the above-mentioned Multiple Crimes, forwarded to the Monrovia City Court, Temple of Justice and detained at the Monrovia Central Prison on orders of said Monrovia City Court.
- Further to the above, Petitioners also submit and aver that Petitioners by and thru their Legal Counsels procured and tendered a valid Criminal Appearance Bond which was duly approved by his Honor Roosevelt Z. Willie, Resident Circuit Judge of Criminal Court “A” and filed with the clerk of that court and served on the Prosecution. Thereafter, the Petitioners, thru their legal Counsels appeared in the court and sought the release of the Defendants but his Honor the Judge refused to order the release and insisted that he will wait to see if the Prosecution will file Exceptions to the Bond and if not, then he will release the Defendants from detention, but if the Prosecution filed any Exceptions, he would not release the Defendants until he ruled on the Exceptions.
- Upon Defendants’ Criminal Appearance Bond being presented to the Judge for approval, and as a part of his approving the Defendants’ Bail Bond, the Co-Respondent Judge, his Honor Roosevelt Z. Willie demanded and required the Defendants to produce living human beings to serve as Human Sureties in addition to their Criminal Appearance Bond to ensure that the Defendants will not escape the jurisdiction of the court. Each of the Defendants brought their relatives and other prominent persons who signed a written undertaking that the defendants will be available for the Trial whenever the case is called.
- Further to the above, the Petitioners contended that their bond is legally valid and should be allowed to stand, firstly, because it was successfully justified by them and secondly, because the Co- Respondent Judge already demanded the defendants to bring human sureties to buttress and provide an extra layer of security in addition to the Criminal Appearance Bond, whose sole purpose and intention is to ensure the appearance of the Defendants whenever the case is called. For reliance, see the case, Zuo v Morris et al [1994] 37 LLR 604 (1994) (22 September 1994) Syll. 1,3,4. It is the contention of the Petitioners that the stage is already past for entertaining the Exceptions to the bond.
Cwil procedure law; when is a bond effective ? Civil Prasker Section 63.3- Bund effective when approved by
the Court.
WHEREFORE AND IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, Petitioners pray Your Honor to:
- Grant Petitioners’ petition and Issue the Alternative Writ;
- Correct the errors and reverse the erroneous Ruling of the Co-Respondent Judge in refusing to release the Petitioners/Defendants from custody or detention after having approved their Criminal Appearance Bail Bond, and the Judge insisting on hearing and passing on the Exceptions filed by the Prosecution against the Criminal Appearance Bond tendered by the Defendants, now Petitioners as a pre-condition to ordering their release;