The NEWS (Monrovia)
8 May 2008
editorial
Monrovia — Last Friday, Criminal Court "A" Judge Peter W. Gbenewelleh brought a not guilty judgment in favor of retired army general Charles Julu and Col. Andrew Dorbor who were being prosecuted on treason charges.
However, a day after the ruling, the Liberian government, through its prosecuting arm, the Ministry of Justice, questioned the decision of the court.
Justice Minister Philip A. Z. Banks, speaking at a special edition of the Edward Wilmot Blyden Lecture Forum organized by the Press Union of Liberia, criticized the justice system in the wake of the not guilty verdict. Cllr. Banks unbelievably said the conduct of some judges poses a bigger threat to Liberia than armed robbers.
To make matter worst, President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, upon arrival at the Roberts International Airport Monday, pronounced her acceptance of the judgment of not guilty in favor of Julu and Dorbor. But she later contradicted her acceptance of the court's ruling by telling the two men "go and sin no more".
The president said, "I leave them with their conscience" claiming that the government provided solid evidence linking Gen. Julu and Col. Dorbor to subversive activities but that the court chose to do otherwise.
Although President Johnson-Sirleaf said she respected the judgment of the court and pointed out that democracy was working in Liberia, it is difficult to believe that the president's pronounced respect for the court's judgment in this matter is not a smoke screen.
If the verdict from the treason retrial indicates that democracy is at work in Liberia as stated by the president, then we are afraid that by referring to the acquitted men "go and sin no more" was a sad comment that threatens future cases government may have interest in.
As far as the trial was concerned, Julu and Dorbor did not commit any crime; therefore, to say the men should "go and sin no more" indicates that they committed the crime of treason, but that the Judge ruled in their favor in the face of the government's so-called 'solid evidence' adduced during the trial.
In the eye of the law, the prosecution failed to produce evidence beyond reasonable doubts for which the judgment went in favor of the defendants.
It must be pointed out that the rule of law is not one sided, and the court system should not be criticized only because prosecution failed to prove a case.
The state should identify its weaknesses and go back to the drawing board if it must win future big cases. To bad mouth the justice system will not help the prosecution to win cases.
Let it be known that a weak prosecution team will hardly produce evidence beyond reasonable doubts to win a case in a court of competent jurisdiction.
It is a terrible omen for our fledging democracy to bad-mouth a court of competent jurisdiction. The government should rather note its dismal performances in high-profiled cases and reconsolidate for better results.
Read comments. Write your own.
Copyright © 2008 The NEWS. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
The News news parper editorial on the recent verdict on messrs. Julu and Dorbor is badly written. First, the phrase "bath mouth" does not collaborate with what is written in the body of the editorrial comment. Moreover one wonders if the editorial staff of this paper has similar comment when the quilty verdict was pronounced on the the two men by a jury trial? The destruction of Liberia was partly attributed to the bad journalistic practices in the country. Now is the time for the Press Union of Libeia ro re=examine itself and set an international standard that is consumable anywhere and everywhere.
Result of treason trial by judge should be analysis evaluated by the both parties, government and the court, but retract is not a solution, because of our young democracy, we need to engage in the proper line of attack, is what we called democracy.
I personally appreciated the result, even boasted to my friends from the other West African states. That democracy is working in Liberia and the president should not response to the decisions of other branch of government like this, because they are partners managing the country. I believed that government should review his prosecution stand and not to precipitate charges against citizens with out strong evident.
And Ellen should be proud of the result.
samuka Dolley
Garmack,
Thanks for the observation on the editorial, but the main issue is whether the statements by the governemnt Chief Prosecutor and the Harvard trained president/Human Rights Activist are good for our young democracy.
The Honorable Justice Minister immediately condemned the Judge when the verdict came down.Is he saying that the men should had been convicted in the face of the government miserable performance throughout the trial? The president returned home and shamelessly try to play God,"go and sins no more." Who is she to tell other Liberians not to commit sins when she helped Taylor to kill haf of a million Liberians just for power?
There may be some mistakes in the editorial, but the issue is clear in our Liberian term; bad mouthing the ruling will not change the verdict, it will only make the Judge more popular amongst opened minded Liberians. We know Ellen does not like the Krahns, but they are Liberians and must be protected by the laws that proect all Liberians. Her staement made it clear to the krhan folks, that they are all guilty of subversive acts, except that they have not been arrested by Fumba and Fahnbulleh.
Let us discuss the statements instead of going after the Editor who are think is doing his best.
Thanks,
Twuyesoe
Mr Editor, I appreciate this editorial titled, "Bad-Mouth Will not Help Govt Prosecutors." It was well written and it warns Govt Prosecutors in particular and the Judicial System in Liberia in general that truly justice is not in the favor of one "powerful" party against a "weak" party. Moreover, human beings do not have to play God. When we pronounce on our fellow man, "Go and sin no more", are we not playing God? We all are sinners in the sight of God. For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God. So if one says to another, "go and sin no more," the speaker implies that he/she is clean, righteous, sinless, perfect, which equates him/her to God, while the addressee is the opposite which equates him/her to Satan/Devil. Is it not clear, then, that we make God a lair "if we say we have no sin," when in fact we are sinners? My advice is, let the "Pastor" re-evaluate the theology which gave rise to that quotation: "God and sin no more."