Liberia: Tweah, Others to Be Let Off the Hook?

Judge Roosevelt Willie of Criminal Court ‘C’ is facing what some would consider his greatest and most crucial professional decision as he prepares to make a determination regarding the subject matter jurisdiction of the over US$500,000 corruption case involving former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and others.

The defendants, who were members of the National Security Council (NSC) guided by the National Security Council Reform and Intelligence Act of 2011, face the question of disclosing sensitive national security information in the legal proceedings. Judge Willie’s ruling will determine the court’s handling of this complex issue.

The National Security Reform Law prohibits disclosure of any information that comes to them by virtue of being “members of the National Security Council,” one of the key arguments the defense motion to dismiss the indictment raised that Judge Willie would have to decide.

During proceedings on Wednesday, February 26, Judge Willie heard arguments on the merit and demerit of whether it was necessary to compel members of the NSC to disclose sensitive information of funding allocated to the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) for national security operations.

Immediately afterwards, Willie reserved his ruling for tomorrow, Friday, February 28.

The government sought Willie’s decision to have members of the NSC, to include former Finance Minister Samuel Tweah, Cllr. Nyanti Tuan, former Acting Minister of Justice and Jefferson Karmoh, former National Security Advisor to President Weah, to publicly release the national security information. Others include Stanley S. Ford, former Director General, and D. Moses P. Cooper, former Financial Intelligence Comptroller of the FIA.

But, during yesterday’s proceedings, one of the defense lawyers, Cllr. Wilfred Sayeh argued that not only members of the National security council are prohibited from revealing information at the pain of jail, but that they would like to clear their names and reputation by revealing sensitive national security information. He added that they are prohibited by law from doing so.

Cllr. Sayeh”s argument was backed by the proceedings.

The prosecution raised the contention that the defendants do not have to testify in the court for national security reasons. Rather, they would still be able to prove them guilty without their testimony.

It is not just that members of the security council cannot disclose but that the information they cannot disclose should not make its way to the public whether by trial or any other means. That is the ESSENTIAL QUESTION on which Judge Willie would have to rule on Friday.

Besides, the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) investigation alleges that the NSC members transferred US$500,000 and L$1,055,152,540 from the Central Bank of Liberia (CBL) through the operational account of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) for national security purposes but they do not know on what purposes.

Further to his argument, Cllr. Sayeh wonders if the LACC cannot know these purposes because of national security. “So why did the Government indict the members of the National Security Council?”

Sayeh also argued that even if the LACC or Government had access to the national security information at bar in the current case, adding, “Should the court entertain this information and in so doing might the court be sanctioning violations of national security statutes?”

According to Sayeh, it is not just that members of the security council cannot disclose but that the information they cannot disclose should not make its way to the public whether by trial or any other means.

In response to Sayeh’s argument, the prosecution said, the Government entity, like the courts, can be the recipients of such sensitive information. There were also claims and counterclaim on the motion to dismiss the indictment. The prosecution argued that the filing of the motion was mistimed.

But, the defense in counterargument said that under civil and criminal procedures, filing of motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction can be done at any time, citing the relevant code under the law.

By Liberian Observer.