BREAKING: Former Liberian Government Official Cries Over Alleged Corruption Allegation_ Liberia 2026

Ajouté : 2026-05-23

[00:00:00]To weaponize a legal process simply because of a political agenda is counterproductive to the future of our country.

[00:00:12]People are following us. International actors are following us.

[00:00:17]Some people are operating, they don't understand.

[00:00:21]Why would you leave from here now, you start pressurizing people who are several zero, you'll go and go do something. You'll go arrest something.

[00:00:29]You'll make sure you're lying on a person.

[00:00:32]What is that?

[00:00:34]What is that?

[00:00:35]So, that is why we have called you guys here.

[00:00:40]That this process is illegal.

[00:00:43]Samuel Tweah is a free man.

[00:00:46]The father the verdict speak speaks to him and the juror returned that day with a not guilty verdict and the judge inside in open court declared that you are not guilty and hence forth leave from the prison Benjamin Wark, you are a free man.

[00:01:02]Samuel Tweah is a free man along with Moses Kpolleh.

[00:01:07]And when we told the jurors that day in the final argument that today we stand at the beginning of the documentation of the check and balance of our democracy to determine whether or not we go back or we retrospect or regret to our dark days or you putting a check and balance on powerful power or powerful executive that will manipulate a political process under the disguise of legal proceedings.

[00:01:35]And we told them that when you make that decision to free the defendants you will know when you walk out there the country will be rejoicing even up into the money and it came to pass.

[00:01:48]You think this is a joke?

[00:01:50]This is history. We call it the opportunity of history unfolding itself.

[00:01:57]The jury has spoken.

[00:01:59]The people has spoken.

[00:02:02]There can be no whims and caprices, naked brute forces that can overturn, overturn, or direct the decision of the unanimous of the of the voluntary verdict returned by the trial jury.

[00:02:22]The majority verdict. Therefore, we'll have the GSC on the audit.

[00:02:27]So, this is witchcraft.

[00:02:29]So, when somebody tells me that because the finance minister authorized expenditure, and he you are going to make a follow-up.

[00:02:39]You kidding me? The finance minister of the country?

[00:02:44]I don't understand.

[00:02:45]But, this is not good for our democracy.

[00:02:49]For those who don't know, some some who are actual actors in our body politics, some of them were not here when we're in the conflict.

[00:02:58]Nobody prays for conflict in this country. I say always say it. I want our country peaceful. But, the point is we are thinking that we must not repeat the history, the wrongs of the past.

[00:03:11]The people who repeat the wrong of the past that caused in the problem, they are people who are ignorant.

[00:03:18]And many actors, some of them were even sucking breast when we're in the dilemma of the 14 years. So, they did not understand the 14 years from 1990 to present, the dilemma, the catastrophe that we experienced. Some of the very people who are all around insulting people when you speak as a librarian, where you are a citizen and it's your right to speak, some of them were even sucking breast milk. They never knew what happened here.

[00:03:44]So, when you say something, instead of them to listen and learn, they refuse.

[00:03:48]But, history tells us that history is a raw material for political science.

[00:03:54]Political actors will be people who must digest history because if you don't understand your history when you're making political decisions, you have problems in your public policy decisions.

[00:04:06]So, to be a public policy administrator, you must be somebody who understand the road material for political science, and that road material is history.

[00:04:14]And so, you must know what went wrong.

[00:04:17]Where are we? Where do we intend to go?

[00:04:21]This decision is a revisitation of the factors of the dark ages. It's time for somebody to come and impress on the court to revise a litigation that have gone through due process consistent with the constitution and call for an investigation is an attempt to even ask a judge to order my his own decision.

[00:04:44]And we as arm of the court will not allow that to sit here, and that's why we're going to the Supreme Court. Let the Supreme Court speak. We don't want favor from the Supreme Court.

[00:04:52]But, the Supreme Court must look at the law. That's all we want.

[00:04:55]And that what the Supreme Court is all about.

[00:04:58]The law.

[00:04:59]Go and look at the law. They will look at the law and say, "Oh, yes. This is the law." And yeah, yeah, "No, this is not the law."

[00:05:05]Finish.

[00:05:06]So, that is why we call you for.

[00:05:08]And so, on this basis, we want to say to you that we have filed a petition for the issuance of the writ of prohibition before the honorable Supreme Court. And that there is a stay order on the investigation because this is a witch hunt.

[00:05:25]This is a witch hunt.

[00:05:27]We cannot change the laws because of Samuel 12.

[00:05:31]We can't do that.

[00:05:34]The country will stay. We will go.

[00:05:40]We need to be reminded about history.

[00:05:43]There were powerful people in this country.

[00:05:46]Some of them who were young little bit older than in ancient the ancient we saw people men that we saw in this town.

[00:05:54]Setting down came, we saw them that they were people who have never served government before.

[00:06:00]Government will come and government will go, but this is the law. We can't change the law.

[00:06:07]This is a witch hunt. Imagine.

[00:06:10]Immediately after the verdict the next day we received a call and a letter summary the former final medical minister again for another criminal investigation.

[00:06:20]You don't have to be a politician or a political scientist to understand that this is not a witch hunt.

[00:06:26]This is witch hunt.

[00:06:28]This is witch hunt.

[00:06:30]If I were a prosecutor, I would not issue that kind of assignment or request.

[00:06:35]But this is witch hunt.

[00:06:38]And we listen to some practitioners even I inviting the finance minister.

[00:06:43]They say even if they gain they authorize the money to go to somebody spending agency, your duty is to follow up with that spending agency and ask them how they spend the money. Is that the authority under the PFM law of the Minister of Finance?

[00:06:58]No.

[00:07:00]The Minister of Finance his authority is to spend the money and when he's spending the money he must have the authorized authority.

[00:07:08]Because the term has ended.

[00:07:12]Two, he has disbanded the jury.

[00:07:15]The jurors are citizens now.

[00:07:19]And three, you cannot conduct a conduct an investigation that you say I and my client all of our colleagues everybody are subjects of the investigation, but they cannot be in the investigation to know what is the complaint to read the content of the complaint and you say you can't proceed you can't give it to us.

[00:07:38]So today what we did we wrote and told him that he must refuse jurisdiction because he is proceeding in violation by of the constitution especially due process under article 28 of the constitution idea.

[00:07:51]So with the judge did not do anything on that.

[00:07:55]And he had decided to continue he then enclosed those seats today no lawyer there and anybody wherever is being said whether somebody is being accused that person has no authority and no right to face the accuser or so on. Assuming I will find them guilty. And so it was one till I think maybe two to four before you got to with the with the with the juror and it will be continued.

[00:08:17]That's one. Two, the law in this jurisdiction and I have been practiced and I would copy from other countries is that when the jury have been disbanded and they have been sent into their into their private life as citizens, you have no authority to just summon them to question them about what happened when you have disbanded.

[00:08:37]Especially when there was no complaint at the time they were not disbanded.

[00:08:43]If they were the time they were not disbanded and you could that complaint was there, then the judge has jurisdiction.

[00:08:49]>> [clears throat] >> But if prior to the disbandment there was no complaint, you disbanded them and after one week or the two weeks and before you say before and three of the jurors that voted against our client come up and say they were conduct juror misconduct and then you send for them and send for all the parties, you have no jurisdiction. That's the law. This is not personal.

[00:09:12]First So for this reason we have gone to the honorable district court on the petition of writ of prohibition to prohibit the conduct of the judge.

[00:09:22]That does not mean we are discrediting the judge. No.

[00:09:25]First we want to appreciate him the manner and form he conducted the trial.

[00:09:30]This was a seriously legally charged and intellectually engaging trial that he was able to manage it by the techniques and titles of courtroom management to the extent that the case ended.

[00:09:48]To see the judge now that we know were all of the caliber of lawyers that were before him, including a former associate justice of the Supreme Court, including a former judge of the Echo House Court who was a lawyer before him, to conduct that trial in the manner and form for us to reach to the conclusion of that case again has a But, this post disbandment of the jury investigation is ultra vires, is illegal, is in violation of the law.

[00:10:22]And we don't want to believe that it is the judge that we know in the case.

[00:10:30]So, that is what we have done today.

[00:10:33]There's a petition that have been filed today.

[00:10:36]And there's a stay order on that investigation.

[00:10:38]And we go to the Supreme Court to give our case.

[00:10:42]We have the laws in our favor.

[00:10:44]The laws are there.

[00:10:46]We just want to inform you. We're not inviting to influence any decision, but to inform you as to the developments that have folded there today and are unfolding.

[00:10:57]The next thing is this.

[00:11:01]These three jurors were asked in court, "Is this your verdict?"

[00:11:13]The judge on every occasion in the trial told them, "When you have any issue with anything that happened there openly in the open court, tell me so we can address it."

[00:11:22]They said, "We have no issue."

[00:11:25]And we understand why all of these things are happening.

[00:11:28]All of the most of these jurors are public servants.

[00:11:33]We understand we get intelligence that people are pressurizing these jurors in the places they work.

[00:11:41]In the places they work.

[00:11:44]And their jobs are under threat.

[00:11:49]And we don't believe in our investigation that I'm holding because it is an attempt It is an attempt to influence people over there to lie on people.

[00:12:01]And to be for people to run with it as a propaganda machinery.

[00:12:05]The law is the law.

[00:12:07]The old age tradition of our country have said from almost 200 years on the existence of this country from 1816 to present in our jurisprudence at no time >> [clears throat] >> that a verdict is returned by a quitter and the jury is disbanded, there have been no application for jury tampering and the jury is disbanded.

[00:12:35]And then they said as the jurors go in the community and somebody say they can call them for investigation. Somebody must show what they know. But there are opinions that we borrow from in the great United States.

[00:12:47]In the great United States that we copy from under the stare decisis principle, they said They said once the jurors have dispersed and resume private status recall becomes constitutionally dangerous and legally improper.

[00:13:06]In which case is that? Dallas versus Burden.

[00:13:10]579 2S 40 in 192016.

[00:13:14]US Supreme Court opinion.

[00:13:18]There are other opinions. There is an opinion in Liberia here where the Liberian Supreme Court said when the juror had returned a verdict of a quitter and there is a complaint of jury tampering, the judge should not disband the jury.

[00:13:35]Let me understand the gap there.

[00:13:38]When they returned the verdict, they acquitted the man.

[00:13:41]But they are not yet disbanded. They stay under the jurisdiction of the court because everybody is in open court. And a party makes an application to the court of jury tampering, the judge will stop that whole proceeding and conduct an investigation.

[00:13:56]That is the law.

[00:13:57]But when there is no complaint where the jury have been pulled and then the verdict have been recorded and the parties have given thanks to the jury and they disbanded the jury and they go into their private life, you cannot because it is issue of jurisdiction.

[00:14:15]The authority to call a jury about a proceeding in a February term of court is an issue of jurisdiction.

[00:14:24]The judge presiding has no jurisdiction to review a proceeding of the last term, February term. He has no jurisdiction.

[00:14:33]He's a fine gentleman. He's a fine judge. Smart judge. Eloquent judge. But in this one, he's in error.

[00:14:43]He's in error. This is not with any disrespect to him. We appreciate him. We really admire him with the manner and form that he conducted.