By 
Monrovia, Liberia — Liberian activist Martin K. N. Kollie has issued a strongly worded critique of the Supreme Court’s ruling against controversial social commentator Justine Oldpa Yeazeahn, popularly known as “Prophet Key,” arguing that while vulgar speech should be condemned, the legal process in the case allegedly violated fundamental principles of justice.
In a detailed public statement intended as a “simple legal guide” for residents of West Point and Soniewein, Kollie maintained that the case reflects a troubling erosion of due process in Liberia’s judicial system.
Kollie began by distancing himself from Prophet Key’s style of communication, describing it as “un-African, un-Liberian, uncultured, and uncivilized.”
However, he stressed that condemnation of language should not justify what he believes were violations of constitutional and procedural rights.
According to Kollie, the ruling by the Supreme Court of Liberia appeared more punitive than judicial, warning that such decisions risk undermining public trust in the justice system.
Central to Kollie’s argument is his claim that Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, Sr., Liberia’s Chief Justice, should have recused himself from the case.
He cited the legal principle Nemo Judex in Causa Sua — meaning a judge should not preside over a case in which they have personal interest — asserting that the Chief Justice’s involvement allegedly compromised the fairness of the proceedings.
Kollie further referenced Liberia’s Judicial Canons and Judiciary Law provisions that discourage judges from presiding over matters involving personal stakes, questioning why recusal did not occur.
The activist also argued that the Court’s decision to jail Prophet Key for six months contradicts existing law governing criminal contempt.
He pointed to statutory provisions that, in his interpretation, limit imprisonment for contempt to a maximum of 30 days, contending that the sentence imposed exceeded legal limits and therefore constituted excessive judicial power.
Kollie additionally referenced the 2019 Kamara Abdullah Kamara Act, which decriminalized many speech-related offenses, arguing that insults should be treated as civil matters rather than criminal ones.
Beyond domestic law, Kollie warned that the ruling could attract scrutiny from international human rights organizations, particularly because Liberia is a signatory to regional commitments encouraging the abolition of criminal defamation and insult laws.
He stressed that Article 15 of the Constitution guarantees free expression, cautioning that the case could be interpreted globally as evidence of shrinking civic space.
Kollie concluded by urging the judiciary to apply the same urgency shown in Prophet Key’s case to matters involving corruption, abuse of power, rape, and other serious crimes.
He emphasized that criticism of courts should not be equated with contempt, warning that the precedent set in this case could affect any citizen who challenges public officials in the future.
