Konneh, Dillon Oppose Jury Abolition -Senators Reject Gbeisay’s Jury Trial Proposal

MONROVIA – Chief Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay’s call to scrap jury trials has met organized and articulate resistance in the Liberian Senate. Senators Amara M. Konneh and Abe Darius Dillon accept his diagnosis of jury tampering. They firmly reject his proposed cure. Konneh treats abolition as a constitutional question before a policy one. Removing the right, he argues, requires a two-thirds legislative vote and a national referendum. Dillon prefers a homely analogy: no one burns down a house to kill a rat. Both warn that corruption would simply follow power to the judge’s bench. As THE ANALYST reports, the senators’ pushback shifts the burden squarely to the Judiciary. It must now show why reform cannot work first.

Two senators have publicly rejected Chief Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, Sr.’s call to abolish the trial jury system, arguing that jury tampering should be met with reform rather than the removal of a constitutional right.

Senator Amara M. Konneh of Gbarpolu County and Senator Abe Darius Dillon, a Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued separate responses after the Chief Justice made the call at the opening of the Supreme Court’s October Term.

“When the Chief Justice of the Republic speaks, the nation must listen carefully,” Konneh stated, crediting Gbeisay with putting the crisis in the justice system at the center of the national conversation, “where it belongs.”

He agreed that jury tampering and juror bribery undermine the justice system, lead to acquittals that defy the evidence and erode public trust.

Konneh said the Chief Justice is right to demand a response, and that as a senator sworn to uphold the Constitution he must engage with the proposal honestly and with the seriousness it demands.

“But abolishing jury trials is not the answer. Before it is a policy question, it is a constitutional question,” he declared.

Constitutional Question First

Konneh pointed out that Article 20(a) of the 1986 Constitution guarantees every accused person the right to a speedy, public and impartial trial by a jury of the vicinity, a right no legislative statute or judicial directive can remove.

He noted that removing it would require a constitutional amendment under Articles 91 and 92, a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and ratification by the Liberian people in a national referendum.

“The people must consent to removing their own right. That is the point: the constitutional foundation must be respected,” the Gbarpolu senator stressed.

He argued that abolition treats the symptom while leaving the disease intact, because removing juries from the courtroom would not remove corruption from the courtroom or eliminate the possibility of a judge being bribed, intimidated or politically pressured.

“Concentrating all decision-making power in a single judicial officer creates a more efficient target for the very forces that now corrupt juries. Corruption follows power. Wherever verdicts are decided, corrupt actors will attempt to influence that process,” Konneh warned.

Konneh’s Reform Package

Konneh proposed reform instead of abolition, including mandatory sequestration and anonymity for jurors in serious criminal cases, meaningful juror pay and protection so that ordinary Liberians can serve without fear, prosecution of jury tampering as a standalone offense with mandatory custodial sentences, and a transparent, professionally managed jury selection system.

“These are not radical ideas. They are standard features of functioning justice systems that Liberia has not yet implemented,” he noted.

He described the jury as the only institution where ordinary Liberian citizens directly check the power of the state, adding that “in a country with a living memory of what unchecked power produces, we should strengthen that check, not eliminate it.”

Konneh expressed great respect for the Chief Justice and understanding of his frustration, and invited him to bring a comprehensive Jury Reform Act to the Legislature for public hearings.

“Let us fix the system together. If reform ultimately fails, the constitutional amendment process exists for exactly that reason. But abolition cannot be our first answer,” Konneh declared. He summed up his position in six words: “Fix the system. Do not end the right.”

Dillon: Don’t Burn the House

For his part, Dillon framed his objection with an analogy, telling the Chief Justice that if a rat is disturbing a house, the first or only option should not be to burn the house down to get rid of it.

He said there are many smart, reasonable and commonsense means of removing the rat while saving the house, such as setting a rat trap, bringing in cats to chase it out or placing rat medicine in various areas of the house.

“It is unwise and unreasonable to burn down an entire house just to get rid of the annoyingly disturbing rat,” Dillon argued.

He insisted that the first and only option to jury tampering cannot be to abolish the fundamental right to trial by jury, adding that suggesting it as the only option “clearly exposes weakness of the system and lack of innovation to reform for the better.”

Dillon proposed a review of the jury system to strengthen the criteria for selecting jurors, including who can serve and what requirements should qualify a person to serve, as well as increased incentives for jurors.

He also suggested harsher punishment for those who facilitate tampering, jurors who are tampered with and those who benefit from verdicts resulting from tampering, along with other measures deemed necessary and legally appropriate.

As a senator and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dillon said he is available, in line with his lawmaking and oversight responsibilities, to coordinate with the Judiciary through the Supreme Court to ensure smart and innovative reforms in the justice system.

“But I respectfully disagree with your suggestion to outrightly abolish the fundamental right to trial by jury as the cure against jury-tampering,” he stated.