Why They Submitted to LACC Investigation? As Supreme Court Reserved Ruling
FLASHBACK: Tweah and other former officials during the early stage of their corruption case
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
TEMPLE OF JUSTICE, Monrovia–Supreme Court Associate Justice, Boakai Kanneh, who was commissioned and seated on August 20,2025, has questioned one of the defense lawyers, Cllr. Arthur Johnson in the corruption trial of former Finance Minister, Samuel Tweah and other former CDC government officials.
Justice Kannah asked Cllr. Johnson: why his clients submitted to the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission investigation since this matter borders National Security issue?
The question from the Supreme Court Justice, who has been on a sick leave since his seating ceremony, came in the wake of Cllr. Johnson argument that his clients ex-finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and other co-defendants actions are immune from being prosecuted during a hearing a petition for a writ of prohibition at the Supreme Court of Liberia chamber
Cllr. Johnson further argued that prosecuting Samuel D. Tweah and other co-defendants is also prosecuting former President George Weah directly and indirectly.
“If such door is open by prosecuting agents of the National Security Council, it will give way to other successive governments” Said Cllr. Johnson.
Arguing his writ of prohibition filed against the government of Liberia and the judge then presiding Roosevelt Z. Willie, Cllr. Johnson, Cllr Johnson said, an attempt to publicly explain how money was expended by members of the National security Council is an attempt to expose security matters or secret.
“There are certain clandestine information at the National Security Agency that should not be exposed to the public especially when it has security risks or implications that endanger an individual or country.
To further his argument, Cllr. Johnson cited section 11 of the National Security Agency Act
The defense lawyer Johnson cited Article 50&61 of the Liberian Constitution. Article 50 states The Executive Power of the Republic shall be vested in the President who shall be Head of State, Head of Government and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Liberia. The president shall be elected by universal adult suffrage of registered voters in the Republic and shall hold office for a term of six years commencing at noon on the third working Monday in January of the year immediately following the elections. No person shall serve as President for more than two terms and Article 61 also states that the President shall be immune from any suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or otherwise, and from arrest, detention or other actions on account of any act done by him while President of Liberia pursuant to any provision of this Constitution or any other laws of the Republic. The President shall not, however, be immune from prosecution upon removal from office for the commission of any criminal act done while President.
Also arguing in favor of the Defendants, former Supreme Court Justice Wilkins Micheal Wrights said, everything surrounding the alleged expenditure of the funding is secrecy and can only be accounted for through the General Auditing Commission when the president orders it and it’s said report can be used for prosecution and not LACC investigations.
The defense lawyers prayed court to grant their petition including their legal citations as contained in their brief.
As for prosecution headed by Montserrado County attorney Cllr. Richard Scott Jr. argued the Samuel D. Tweah other co-defendants case are similar to the Brownie Samukai case where the Supreme Court ruled that subordinates of various government agencies should refuse illegal orders from their bosses even if it causes them to resigned.
Prosecution further maintained that the alleged money wasn’t used for National Security matters as being claimed by the defense lawyers but rather, it went through the account of the Financial Intelligence Agency account where it was disbursed among those accused.
Prosecution lawyer told the Supreme Court justices that this case a-bar has nothing to do with National Security issue and prayed court to deny and dismiss the defendants petition and called on the court to take Judicial notice of their brief including law citations.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has reserved ruling into the petition for a writ of prohibition.
However, two of the justices Ceaineh D. Clinton Johnson and Jamestta Howard Wolokolie recused themselves from the hearing because they earlier made a determination into the matter.
The case has been sleeping at the Supreme Court nearly nine months of delay, the full bench of the Supreme Court
The hearing is expected to commence at 11am in the Chambers of the Supreme Court.
The high court has instructed that all parties be present for the arguments in the writ of prohibition filed by former finance minister and four other ex-officials of government.
However, the Supreme Court on March 20, 2025, put stay order on all proceedings or actions pending the hearing or outcome of the case.
The decision follows the lower court’s rejection of a motion to dismiss, which the defense had filed, arguing that the defendants were protected under national security laws and executive immunity provisions.
The case centers on allegations that Tweah, along with former Acting Justice Minister Nyenati Tuan, former National Security Adviser Jefferson Karmoh, former Director of the Financial Intelligence Agency Stanley S. Ford, and former FIA Controller D. Moses P. Cooper, orchestrated the unauthorized transfer of L$1,055,152,540 and US$500,000 from the Central Bank of Liberia (CBL) to the FIA’s operational accounts. Prosecutors allege that the funds remain unaccounted for, pointing to financial misconduct at the highest levels of the former administration.
The Supreme Court’s decision to place a hold on the trial represents a legal twist in a case that has seen a battle over the interpretation of national security laws, executive immunity, and financial oversight. Sources familiar with the ruling indicate that the high court intends to review the constitutionality of the lower court’s decision before allowing the trial to proceed.
Defense Argues Immunity and National Security Protections
The defense has persistently argued that the defendants were acting under the direct authority of former President George M. Weah, who chaired the National Security Council, and that their actions fall within classified national security operations, making them immune from prosecution. They cited the National Security Reform and Intelligence Act of 2011 and the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) Act of 2022 as the basis for their immunity claims.
“The Movants were all members and agents of the National Security Council (NSC) of Liberia who were responsible for carrying out the functions of the NSC, chaired by the President of Liberia. Their actions were strictly for national security purposes, and this court does not have the jurisdiction to review such matters,” the defense argued in its motion.
Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie of Criminal Court ‘C’ rejected this argument, ruling that national security provisions do not grant a blanket exemption from financial accountability. He cited explicit clauses in the NSRI Act that mandate financial oversight, stating, “This provision does not exempt NSRI members from legally mandated accountings within the Government of Liberia.”
Additionally, Judge Willie ruled that Article 61 of the Liberian Constitution, which provides immunity to the sitting President, does not extend to appointed officials. “The President shall be immune from any suits, actions, or proceedings, judicial or otherwise… However, the President shall not be immune from prosecution upon removal from office for the commission of any criminal act,” he stated in his ruling.
Prosecution Pushes for Accountability
The prosecution, led by the Ministry of Justice and the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), insists that this is not a case of national security but one of public financial accountability. They argue that the transfers authorized by Tweah were not requested by the National Security Council, the National Joint Security, or the FIA itself, raising serious red flags.