Former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and four other former government officials from the Weah regime faces charges of economic sabotage.
By Lincoln G. Peters
Monrovia, March 3, 2025/ Criminal Court “C” Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie has denied former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah, Jr., and four others’ request to dismiss the ongoing corruption charges against them for national security reasons.
Tweah, alongside Cllr. Nyanti Tuan (former Acting Minister of Justice), Stanley S. Ford (former Director General of Financial Intelligence), D. Moses P. Cooper (former Financial Intelligence Comptroller), and Jefferson Karmoh (former National Security Advisor to President George Weah), were indicted by LACC on charges of economic sabotage, theft, illegal disbursement and expenditure of public funds, criminal conspiracy, misuse of public money, and criminal facilitation.
The indictment alleges that the defendants violated the Financial Intelligence Agency Act of 2022 by conspiring to transfer US$500,000 and L$1,055,152,540 from the Central Bank of Liberia through the operational account of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU).
Early last week, Tweah and others filed a motion before Criminal Court “C” Judge Willie requesting that the Judge dismiss the indictment of Economic Sabotage brought against them. They argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to preside over such a matter, citing national security interests.
But the judge in his ruling Friday, February 28, said the case could not be dismissed as prayed for by the defense because of the totality of the circumstances and laws regarding the instant case.
According to Judge Willie, the Liberian Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) did not establish any proof or documentary evidence such as instruction or letter of request from the National Joint Security or the FIA or a Joint Security Resolution or from the former President to Co-Defendant/Co-Movant Tweah, for which he (Co-Defendant/Co-Movant Samuel Tweah) approved and subsequently ordered the transferred of the above mentioned amounts to the FIA account.
He further indicated that, predicated upon these actions by Tweah and others, the LACC, through the Ministry of Justice, is alleging that the defendants acted outside of the privilege provided to agents of the President in Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia. Therefore, they cannot enjoy this privilege, for which they must answer, and the only place to answer is this Court, Criminal Court “C.”
” IN VIEW THEREFORE, this case cannot be dismissed for lack of subject matter Jurisdiction, based on the facts, circumstances, and the laws cited herein above, and the Prosecution/Respondent must be given the opportunity to prove their case. Hence, the Motion to Dismiss is hereby denied, and the case is ordered proceeded forthwith,” Judge Willie ruled.
However, responding to the judge’s ruling in an interview with Journalists following the closing argument, one of the defense lawyers, Cllr. Johnson argued and maintained that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case.
He further argued that the judge went beyond the scope of operation to deny the dismissal of the case as prayed and petitioned.
Cllr. Johnson contended that when specific provisions of the constitution are raised as subject matter of discussion in the trial, a court of limited jurisdiction can’t and doesn’t have the authority to interpret the constitution, which is ascribed to the full bench of the Supreme Court of Liberia.
” The judge today erred, the ruling to deny the petitioner petition to dismiss the case went beyond the scope of the court. In fact, the government proceeds to expose national security operations, especially about expenditure during elections, to keep the country safe from threat. So, today, the judge ascribed himself an authority he doesn’t have,” he stated.
The prosecution argues that the NSC’s operations, which include financial transactions, fall under the purview of national security laws. They refer to the National Security Reform and Intelligence Act of 2011, which outlines the authority of security institutions, including the NSC, and the need for independent procurement and accounting systems.
They further argue that the General Auditing Commission should audit the NSC’s accounts annually and that the law mandates legislative regulation of the functions and divisions of national security agencies.
The prosecution maintains that, even assuming the NSC’s actions were carried out under the scope of national security, this does not grant immunity from criminal investigation or prosecution if illegal acts were committed. They also argue that the defendants cannot claim immunity or secrecy protections in relation to their actions.
In response, the defense contends that the indictment violates statutory and executive immunity principles, arguing that members of the NSC, as agents and advisors to the President, cannot be compelled to disclose information about national security operations.
They argue that judicial review of NSC actions could breach national security protocols and that the court lacks jurisdiction over the NSC’s operations. The defense maintains that the charges should be dismissed, as the defendants were performing duties under the National Security Reform and Intelligence Act of 2011, which safeguards national security interests.
Cllr. Johnson claimed that the government’s prosecution of Tweah and other ex-officials is a recipe for exposing national security operations. Edited by Othello B. Garblah.
