Monrovia –The acquittal of former Finance and Development Planning Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr. in the widely publicized US$6.2 million corruption case has triggered intense political debate and divided public opinion across Liberia, with opposition supporters celebrating the verdict as a triumph of justice while several government officials and ruling party supporters insist the ruling still validates the Boakai administration’s anti-corruption campaign.
By Selma Lomax, [email protected]
The case, which lasted for 46 days before Criminal Court “C” at the Temple of Justice, centered on allegations surrounding the disbursement and alleged misuse of over US$6.2 million reportedly intended for national security operations during the administration of former President George Manneh Weah.
Prosecutors alleged that the funds were unlawfully withdrawn and diverted under the guise of national security spending without proper documentation and accountability procedures.
The legal battle involved five former government officials who served under the Coalition for Democratic Change administration. Those placed on trial included former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr., former Acting Justice Minister Nyenati Tuan, former National Security Advisor Jefferson Karmoh, former Financial Intelligence Agency Comptroller General D. Moses P. Cooper, and former Financial Intelligence Agency Director General Stanley S. Ford.
The prosecution accused the defendants of criminal conspiracy, economic sabotage, theft of public funds, criminal facilitation, theft of property, and money laundering.
The government maintained that the accused abused public trust and illegally handled state resources intended for national security purposes.
After weeks of testimonies, evidence presentation, and legal arguments, the 12-member jury delivered a mixed verdict that dramatically altered the political atmosphere in the country. Samuel D. Tweah Jr. was acquitted on all charges, including criminal conspiracy, economic sabotage, criminal facilitation, theft of public funds, and money laundering. D. Moses P. Cooper was also fully acquitted of all charges brought against him. However, former Acting Justice Minister Nyenati Tuan was found guilty of theft of public funds, criminal facilitation, and theft of property, though the jury returned a hung verdict on the money laundering charge and acquitted him of economic sabotage.
Former National Security Advisor Jefferson Karmoh was found guilty of criminal facilitation and criminal conspiracy, while he was acquitted of economic sabotage and theft of public funds. The jury, however, failed to decide on the theft of property charge against him.
Former FIA Director General Stanley S. Ford received hung verdicts on criminal conspiracy, criminal facilitation, theft of public funds, and money laundering, but was acquitted of economic sabotage.
The mixed verdict immediately sparked contrasting reactions from politicians, legal experts, ordinary citizens, and members of both the ruling establishment and the opposition.
Before the verdict was delivered, Solicitor General Cllr. Augustine C. Fayiah had publicly projected confidence in the government’s case against Tweah and the other defendants.
During one of his engagements with reporters weeks before the ruling, Fayiah defended the prosecution’s position and argued that the evidence presented before the court clearly implicated the accused officials.
He insisted that the state had established sufficient grounds to secure convictions and maintained that the prosecution fully understood how national security funds are expected to be managed under Liberian law. “They stole the money and spent it. They know nothing about national security. We understand the process through which national security funds are used,” Cllr. Fayiah declared while reaffirming that the government had no reason to fear the outcome of the case.
However, the eventual acquittal of Tweah and Cooper represented a major setback for the prosecution and instantly shifted public attention toward questions about the strength of the government’s evidence and the overall conduct of the trial.
The defense team, led by Cllr. Arthur T. Johnson emerged from the courtroom in celebration after successfully securing Tweah’s acquittal. Supporters of the former finance minister viewed the ruling as proof that the prosecution had failed to establish criminal intent or direct evidence linking Tweah to any unlawful act.
Tweah himself broke his silence to FrontPage Africa a day after the verdict and maintained that the ruling confirmed the position he had consistently defended throughout the proceedings.
According to him, finance ministers under Liberia’s Public Financial Management Law function as disbursing officers and are not directly accountable for how funds are utilized once they are legally transferred to other government entities.
“We give God Almighty this victory. But I would add that my acquittal is consistent with what I have maintained publicly throughout. Ministers of finance in Liberia are disbursing officers under the PFM law. They are not accountable for monies released to government entities,” Tweah stated.
He further argued that any future prosecution against him would require evidence unrelated to lawful disbursement procedures, while warning that politically motivated cases only waste taxpayers’ money and unintentionally elevate his public profile.
The opposition Congress for Democratic Change (CDC) immediately transformed the acquittal into a political rallying point against the Unity Party-led government. CDC Secretary General Jefferson Koijee described the verdict as a complete rejection of what he termed political persecution orchestrated against Tweah and other former officials of the Weah administration.
In a strongly worded reaction, Koijee accused the Boakai administration of weaponizing state institutions in an attempt to damage the reputation of former CDC officials ahead of future political contests. He portrayed the acquittal as both a legal and spiritual victory for the opposition.
“Yesterday was not just a victory in court, it was a moment of divine intervention. What was meant to break D. Tweah became a testament to his strength. Against a vicious campaign of propaganda, manipulation, and political persecution by the Boakai Koung regime and their demonic system, truth did not bend. Justice did not stay silent,” Koijee asserted.
Beyond his quote, Koijee expanded his criticism by arguing that the government’s anti-corruption fight risks losing credibility if prosecutions are perceived as selective or politically motivated.
According to him, the state failed to present convincing evidence directly linking Tweah to criminal conduct, and the jury’s decision reflected the weakness of the prosecution’s case rather than political influence.
Cornelia Kruah, a stalwart of the ruling Unity Party and Minister of Youth and Sports, responded differently and insisted that the government still secured a moral and legal victory despite Tweah’s acquittal.
Kruah emphasized that the jury acknowledged that millions of dollars were unlawfully handled and convicted several defendants connected to the transaction.
She argued that critics who describe the outcome as a defeat for the government are deliberately ignoring the convictions recorded against other accused officials.
“The government alleged that US$6 million was stolen. The jurors confirmed this, agreeing that US$6 million was indeed stolen, and they convicted three individuals whom they believed are guilty of committing the crime. How is this not a win for the fight against corruption? Money was stolen. Culprits were convicted,” Kruah declared.
She maintained that the verdict demonstrates that Liberia’s justice system remains independent under the Boakai administration and insisted that the government should not be condemned simply because one high-profile defendant was acquitted.
According to her, anti-corruption efforts must be measured by the willingness of the state to investigate and prosecute suspected wrongdoing regardless of political affiliation.
NOCAL Vice President for Finance Emmanuel Azango, who is affiliated with the opposition Liberty Party that aligned with the Unity Party during the 2023 elections, also weighed in on the verdict by stressing the importance of respecting judicial outcomes even when public opinion appears divided.
Azango expressed concern that political actors on both sides were attempting to exploit the case for partisan advantage instead of focusing on the broader need for accountability and institutional reform within Liberia’s public financial management system.
His comments reflected growing concerns among some political observers that the case could deepen partisan hostility rather than strengthen confidence in anti-corruption mechanisms.
Montserrado County Senator Abraham Darius Dillon delivered one of the most reflective reactions following the verdict. Senator Dillon focused less on the defendants themselves and more on the broader contradiction within Liberian society regarding corruption and accountability.
He observed that ordinary citizens frequently accuse public officials of corruption, yet those same citizens often hesitate to convict when serving as jurors in actual criminal proceedings. “The other real and hard truth we all always ignore is that the system is run by human beings. The jurors in criminal cases are fellow Liberians, especially ordinary Liberian citizens. Interestingly, they are the ones who always yell and accuse nearly every public official of being corrupt. But when the jurors get the chance to punish corrupt people under the law and facts, the very jurors mostly set the corrupt people free,” Senator Dillon noted.
His remarks sparked widespread discussion online, with some agreeing that Liberians themselves contribute to weak accountability, while others accused him of disrespecting the jury’s independent decision.
Unity Party member Rixch Barsi Giah responded emotionally to the acquittal and repeatedly questioned whether the jurors truly reflected the national frustration over corruption. In an extended commentary, he argued that testimony from senior security officials contradicted claims that the US$6.2 million expenditure was justified by any national security emergency.
He stressed that many Liberians had expected the case to establish a new precedent in the fight against corruption. “Were the jurors Liberians?” he repeatedly asked while expressing disbelief that the evidence presented did not produce stronger convictions. According to him, the verdict represents a painful reminder that public outrage alone does not always translate into courtroom accountability.
Another Unity Party figure, Mo Ali, defended the prosecution and argued that the convictions secured against some defendants prove that the government’s case was not fabricated.
He maintained that the jury’s decision validated the administration’s position that public funds were indeed mismanaged. “Where is the falsehood? The facts are plain. The government declared that US$6 million was stolen. The jurors confirmed this, agreeing that US$6 million was indeed stolen, and they convicted three individuals,” Mo Ali argued.
He further referenced Liberia’s Criminal Procedure Law and noted that judges possess the authority to order new trials under certain legal circumstances, including cases where verdicts conflict with the weight of evidence or where procedural concerns arise.
Several supporters of the ruling establishment also reacted with frustration and disbelief. Ambassador Raphael E. Donokolo II simply described the outcome as “Unbelievable,” while Emmanuel K. Barnes suggested that the jurors may not have acted rationally when he remarked that “The jurors might have taken something stronger than kush.”
Unity Party Youth Chairman Togar Melvin Cephas attempted to shift the debate toward institutional progress under President Joseph Boakai by emphasizing that the case itself demonstrated respect for due process and judicial independence. “Under JNB, the courts are talking. No mysterious disappearances. No running into exile. Just due process. That’s the difference between then and now. Liberia is changing,” Cephas stated.
On the opposition side, former President George Manneh Weah reacted through his WhatsApp status by offering gratitude to God following Tweah’s acquittal.
“The God of wisdom, joy, greatness, strength, courage, guidance, protection, favor, breakthrough, blessings, and grace, I give you praise, and to you be all the glory,” the former president wrote. Though brief, the message was widely interpreted by CDC supporters as a celebration of the acquittal and a sign of solidarity with former officials of his administration.
Former Grand Bassa County Superintendent Janjay Baikpeh also celebrated the verdict and expressed optimism that appeals would eventually clear the remaining convicted defendants. “God is faithful, and we will celebrate his goodness. We are now getting ready to go to the Supreme Court for our remaining people,” Baikpeh stated.
CDC Chairman Janga Kowo praised the acquittal as a victory for justice and patriotism. He commended the defense lawyers, especially Cllr. Arthur T. Johnson, for what he described as a robust legal defense, while also condemning the Liberia National Police for allegedly targeting CDC supporters during the court proceedings.
“The historic acquittal of former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr. by a jury of ordinary citizens is a victory for justice. Throughout your stewardship as Minister of Finance, you demonstrated raw patriotism,” Kowo declared.
He further insisted that the charges against the former officials should never have been brought in the first place and called on the government to redirect its attention toward Liberia’s growing economic and social challenges.
While supporters of the ruling establishment argue that the convictions secured against some defendants demonstrate progress in the anti-corruption fight, opposition figures insist the acquittal of Tweah exposes what they describe as politically motivated prosecution.
The mixed verdict has therefore left Liberia deeply divided, with many citizens still debating whether justice was fully served or whether the trial merely reinforced the country’s enduring political polarization.
