The story of Jack Smith and his pursuit of Donald Trump is about to enter a new chapter, and this time the American people will get to watch it unfold in real time.

The former special counsel has agreed to testify publicly before the House Judiciary Committee on January 22, marking a significant development in the ongoing examination of his decision to bring federal charges against President Trump. This appearance comes exactly one month after Smith spent eight hours behind closed doors answering questions from committee members about his work as special counsel.

For those keeping score at home, this represents a notable shift in transparency. While closed-door depositions serve their purpose in congressional investigations, there is something fundamentally different about testimony delivered under the bright lights of public scrutiny. The American people deserve to hear directly from the man who made the extraordinary decision to prosecute a former president and current presidential candidate.

According to sources familiar with the matter, Smith himself has long expressed his desire to testify publicly. That willingness to face questions in an open forum is worth noting, though it hardly settles the deeper questions about the propriety of his prosecutions. Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio, who initially demanded the private deposition, has made clear that a public hearing was always part of the plan.

The timing of this hearing carries its own weight. President Trump now sits in the Oval Office once again, having won his campaign while facing the very charges Smith brought against him. The prosecutions have been dropped, the cases dismissed, yet the questions remain. What evidence did Smith believe justified such unprecedented action? How did he weigh the political implications of prosecuting a presidential candidate? What role did the Justice Department play in his decisions?

These are not partisan questions. They cut to the heart of how our justice system operates and whether it can maintain the appearance of impartiality when dealing with the most politically charged cases imaginable.

The House Judiciary Committee will have its opportunity to press Smith on these matters. Republican members will undoubtedly focus on what they view as a politically motivated prosecution, while Democratic members may seek to defend Smith's actions as a necessary application of the rule of law. Both sides will have their say, and Smith will have to answer.

What makes this hearing particularly significant is its potential to provide a historical record. Years from now, when scholars and citizens look back on this tumultuous period in American political and legal history, this testimony will stand as a primary source document. Smith's words, delivered under oath and subject to cross-examination from both parties, will help future generations understand what happened and why.

The eight-hour closed-door deposition in December provided a preview, but public testimony operates under different rules. The cameras will be rolling. The transcript will be immediate. The accountability will be direct.

As this hearing approaches, one thing remains certain: the American people have a right to hear from Jack Smith in his own words, answering tough questions about decisions that shook the foundations of our political system. Whatever one believes about the merits of his prosecutions, sunlight remains the best disinfectant.

Related: Suspicious Object at Palm Beach Airport Prompts Security Changes for Trump Departure