Liberia: Tweah’s Acquittal Hits Snag
Weeks after a jury acquitted former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr. and the Financial Intelligence Agency Comptroller Moses P. Cooper in the US$6.2 million economic sabotage case, the finality of that verdict has been thrown into doubt, with Criminal Court “C” now embroiled in a deepening constitutional standoff over alleged jury misconduct.
Presiding Judge Ousman Feika is yet to give a definite ruling on the explosive post-verdict investigation, leaving one of Liberia’s most politically charged corruption trials suspended between acquittal and annulment.
What was ordered by the Supreme Court to be a swift, transparent inquiry has now stretched into weeks of legal uncertainty, adjournments, and heated open-court exchanges that have laid bare the fragility of the country’s high-profile anti-corruption fight.
The controversy erupted shortly after the not-guilty verdict was handed down in favor of Tweah and Cooper of the George Weah administration.
State prosecutors, who had charged the former officials with economic sabotage, theft and illegal disbursement of over US$6.2 million in public funds, filed an immediate complaint alleging jury tampering.
That complaint has since been re-characterized by the court as an inquiry into jury misconduct, following sworn affidavits from three discharged jurors.
According to court filings, the three jurors alleged serious breaches of sequestration rules during the trial, including unauthorized contacts and movements outside the supervision of court bailiffs while the jury was expected to be isolated.
The allegations, if proven, could be grounds for setting aside the acquittal and ordering a new trial.
In a dramatic turn during the latest hearing, defense lawyers did not simply deny the allegations. They mounted an explosive counter-demand.
The defense asked Judge Feika to subpoena and make public the complete telephone call logs of every party connected to the trial, including state prosecutors, defense lawyers, all empaneled jurors, and the court bailiffs assigned to guard the jury.
Defense counsel argued that selective investigation of jurors alone would prejudice their clients and that only a full disclosure of communications would reveal who, if anyone, was secretly communicating with jurors.
“The court cannot investigate the jury in isolation. If there was contact, let us see who called whom,” one defense lawyer argued in open court, according to attendees.
The demand effectively widens the probe to include the prosecution team itself; a move prosecutor have described as a diversionary tactic.
The adjournment came after nearly two hours of tense legal arguments in open court.
Judge Feika’s decision to pause the proceedings underscores the constitutional weight now attached to the case.
The open-court procedure was itself mandated by Supreme Court Justice in Chambers, Yussif D. Kaba. Justice Kaba had earlier lifted a stay order on the case but expressly ordered that any post-verdict probe must be conducted transparently and not behind closed doors.
The instruction was seen as an effort to preserve public confidence in the judiciary amid intense political polarization surrounding the case.
Tweah’s trial is widely viewed as the first major test of the Boakai administration’s anti-corruption drive and its pledge to audit and prosecute officials of the former Coalition for Democratic Change, CDC, government. Any perception of political interference or judicial opacity could have far-reaching implications.
As of press time, Judge Feika has not set a new date for a ruling on whether to compel the Liberia Telecommunications Authority and GSM companies to release the requested call logs, nor on the substantive question of whether jury misconduct actually occurred.
Legally, the court has three options: dismiss the allegations and affirm the acquittal, nullify the verdict and order a retrial based on proven misconduct, or refer the matter to the Supreme Court for further constitutional guidance.
Until that decision is made, the investigative findings remain in limbo, and with them, the fate of the US$6.2 million case.
For now, Liberia waits, as a case that was meant to deliver a clear statement on impunity instead delivers a prolonged lesson in judicial uncertainty.
