Liberia: Defense Moves to Overturn Split Verdict in Explosive US$6.2 Million Economic Sabotage Trial - FrontPageAfrica

Monrovia – Liberia’s most politically explosive corruption prosecution in recent years is facing a dramatic legal unraveling, as defense lawyers for former Acting Justice Minister Cllr. Nyenati Tuan and former National Security Advisor Jefferson S. Karmoh push to overturn guilty verdicts handed down in the controversial US$6.2 million economic sabotage case.

By Willie N. Tokpah, willien.tokpah@frontpageafricaonline.com

In a Motion for New Trial filed before Criminal Court “C,” defense attorneys argued that the jury’s split verdict is legally contradictory and unsupported by evidence, especially after the acquittal of the prosecution’s alleged “masterminds,” former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr. and former Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) Comptroller D. Moses P. Cooper.

The filing, now before Judge Ousman F. Feika, intensifies a case that has shaken Liberia’s political and legal establishment, exposing deep questions about prosecutorial strategy, evidentiary standards, and the credibility of the government’s anti-corruption campaign.

The Case That Rocked the Boakai Era

The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) indicted Tweah and several former officials of ex-President George Weah’s administration, accusing them of orchestrating the unlawful transfer and use of more than US$6.2 million and L$1 billion allegedly intended for national security operations during the final months of the Weah government.

Prosecutors alleged a coordinated criminal enterprise involving economic sabotage, theft of property, money laundering, criminal facilitation, conspiracy, fraud on Liberia’s internal revenue, and misuse of public funds.

According to the prosecution, Tweah authorized the release of the funds while Cooper oversaw withdrawals through the FIA.

But after a bruising 46-day trial marked by fierce courtroom battles and extensive testimony, the jury returned a fractured verdict that immediately sparked controversy.

Tweah and Cooper were acquitted on all charges, a stunning setback for prosecutors and a ruling many legal observers viewed as a collapse of the government’s central theory.

At the same time, the jury convicted some co-defendants, including former Solicitor General Nyenati Tuan and former National Security Advisor Jefferson Karmoh, while deadlocking on several other counts.

Defense: ‘The Verdict Cannot Stand’

Lawyers representing Tuan and Karmoh say the verdict is not merely flawed, but fundamentally unsustainable under the law.

In the motion, the defense argued that prosecutors failed to produce any direct evidence showing that either man stole, received, converted, or personally benefited from public funds.

Instead, attorneys say the case relied almost entirely on assumptions, internal correspondence, and circumstantial interpretation.

“The Government’s case was built on assumption, not proof,” the motion states. “There exists no credible evidence linking the Movants to any criminal act as charged.”

A major focus of the prosecution’s case was a September 5, 2023, communication authored by Cllr. Tuan in his capacity as Acting Justice Minister and head of the Joint Security apparatus.

Prosecutors described the letter as evidence of conspiracy and criminal facilitation.

But the defense insists the document merely informed the FIA that funding for Joint Security operations had been secured and identified the agency responsible for disbursement — an administrative function they argue was later criminalized without evidence of unlawful intent.

“An Irreconcilable Contradiction”

The defense’s strongest argument centers on what it calls a fatal inconsistency in the jury’s verdict.

According to the filing, the prosecution consistently portrayed Tweah as the architect of the alleged scheme and Cooper as the official who accessed the funds.

Yet both men were fully acquitted.

“If the alleged principal actors have been acquitted, the convictions of alleged secondary actors cannot logically stand,” the defense argued.

Attorneys contend that the acquittals effectively destroyed the legal basis for conspiracy, which requires proof of a shared criminal agreement and intent.

Legal analysts say the argument could pose a significant challenge for the prosecution, particularly because the government’s case leaned heavily on documentary evidence and institutional procedures rather than proof of personal enrichment or direct criminal conduct.

The acquittal of Tweah, viewed by many as the prosecution’s central target, has further fueled criticism that the state failed to meet the burden of proof required in criminal cases.

What Happens Next?

Judge Feika must now decide whether the verdict can survive legal scrutiny or whether a new trial should be ordered.

If the motion is granted, one of Liberia’s most consequential corruption prosecutions could effectively be reset, opening the door to a retrial or possible dismissal of charges.

If denied, sentencing proceedings are expected to move forward, setting the stage for a likely appeal before the Supreme Court of Liberia.

Beyond the courtroom, the case has evolved into a national test of Liberia’s justice system, raising broader concerns about prosecutorial accountability, judicial consistency, and the handling of politically sensitive corruption cases.

For supporters of Tweah and the other defendants, the motion represents an attempt to dismantle what they describe as a politically motivated prosecution that collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions.

For the Boakai administration, however, the case remains a critical battle tied to the credibility of its anti-corruption agenda.

As Liberia awaits Judge Feika’s ruling, the political and legal fallout from the US$6.2 million saga appears far from over.