By: G Bennie Bravo Johnson I
The presiding Judge of the Monrovia Criminal Court A’, Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie has denied the motion prayed for by dependent Samuel D. Tweh – to dismiss the indictment against him and his codefendants. He (Judge Willie) says the case cannot be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the presented facts, circumstances, and laws. The Prosecution must be allowed to prove their case.
Former Finance Minister Tweah and his co-defendants are facing charges related to misappropriation of public funds relating to allegations of economic sabotage, theft, and corruption. Minister Tweh filed a Movants motion praying the court to dismiss the indictment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and grant any other reliefs deemed just, fair, and legal.
The defense argument, as presented in the Movants’ Amended Motion to Dismiss, is that the defendants acted under the authority of the National Security Council (NSC), invoking Section 11(d) of the National Security Reform and Intelligence Act of 2011 (NSRIA) to justify the expenditure of funds1. They assert that the funds were used for national security purposes, granting them broad discretion and shielding their actions from typical scrutiny1.
The defense emphasizes the confidentiality inherent in NSC operations and invokes Section 4(b) of the NSRIA, arguing that compelling the defendants to disclose information about NSC activities would violate executive privilege and immunity. They contend that the court cannot exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the statutory operation of the National Security Council due to the nature of the expenditures.
Furthermore, the defense invokes Section 3(f) of the NSRIA, which deems every member, personnel, or employee of the NSC a trustee of the Republic’s secrets, bound by an oath not to divulge information acquired through their association with the council1. The Movants argue that compelling them to testify would infringe upon their constitutional rights under Article III 21(g) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia.
However, Willie in the February 28, 2025 ruling cited Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution, which states, “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.”
The defendants argued that since former President George M. Weah was Chairman of the National Security Reform Intelligence and is immune from prosecution for any acts committed except by removal by the National Legislature of Liberia, they, acting as his agents under his instruction, should also be barred from prosecution. They contended that prosecuting them would be tantamount to prosecuting the President.
In response, the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), through the Ministry of Justice, alleged that the defendants acted outside the privilege provided to agents of the President in Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution. Therefore, they cannot enjoy this privilege and must answer in Criminal Court “C”.
The indictment drawn by the Grand Jury of Montserrado County on September 5, 2024, states that between September 8-21, 2023, transfer instructions documents submitted to the LACC Investigation by the CBL showed that a total of L$1,055,152,540.00 and US$500,000.00 were transferred to the Operational accounts of the FIA by the CBL as per the instruction from the MFDP.
The investigation did not establish any documentary evidence from the National Security Council or any letter of request from the National Joint Security or the FIA to Co-Defendant Tweah for which he approved and ordered the transfer of the money to the FIA account.
Judge Willie questioned how the defendants rely on the same act claiming immunity from all actions, especially financial transactions, even when there are warnings to members of both acts.
The defendants, in their motion, relied on Section 7(c), which states that this provision does not exempt NSRI members from legally mandated accountings within the government of Liberia. The section clarifies that NSRI members are only exempt from financial transactions if funds provided are expended for vital national security interests. Otherwise, they can be prosecuted according to the law. The NSRI Act of 2011 and the Act establishing the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) state that “No civil, criminal, or administrative action shall be brought against the Director General, any officer, employee, or agent of the FIA acting under the direction of the Director General for anything done in good faith in the administration or lawful discharge of any powers, duties, or functions under this chapter. Notwithstanding, such persons shall not be immune from liability for gross negligence or intentional or malicious crimes, or corruption.”
