MONROVIA – The Supreme Court’s Chambers Justice, Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, has declined to issue the writ of certiorari sought by state prosecutors in the ongoing case involving former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and others.
State lawyers argued that while Justice Gbeisay acknowledged errors in the bond proffered by defendant Tweah, he instructed them to proceed with the case expeditiously.
On December 3, 2024, Justice Gbeisay had issued a stay order halting proceedings originally set to commence on December 4, 2024, after state prosecutors filed a petition for a writ of certiorari against Judge Blamo A. Dixon, defendant Tweah, and four others. The stay order cited all parties to a conference scheduled for December 10, 2024, pending a review of the matter.
The case centers on allegations of economic sabotage, misuse of public funds, illegal disbursement of public money, theft of property, criminal facilitation, and conspiracy leveled against Tweah and his co-defendants by the Republic of Liberia through the Ministry of Justice.
State prosecutors’ nine-count petition accused Judge Dixon of judicial bias for granting defendant Tweah bail on personal recognizance without a formal application. They contended that the criminal appearance bonds filed by Tweah were defective and failed to meet statutory requirements.
Court records reveal that Tweah submitted various property bonds that prosecutors argued were legally insufficient. Two of the properties presented as collateral shared the same identification number, while others were tax-delinquent, creating tax liens that rendered the bonds invalid.
During cross-examination, Tweah’s surety admitted that some properties used as bond were not properly registered in the government system and had significant unpaid taxes. A letter from the Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA), introduced into evidence at the request of prosecutors, confirmed these irregularities. However, Judge Dixon dismissed these objections and deemed the bonds sufficient.
The petition also alleged that Judge Dixon improperly intervened during the proceedings by using the LRA letter to question the surety directly, despite the surety’s claim of not having been served with the document. Prosecutors contended that this conduct violated the principle of judicial neutrality and undermined the integrity of the bond justification process.
In his ruling, Justice Gbeisay declined to issue the writ of certiorari, effectively allowing the case to proceed. He advised prosecutors to address the alleged errors in the lower court and expedite the trial process.
The decision has drawn criticism from state lawyers, who argue that the lower court’s acceptance of defective bonds compromises the fairness of the judicial process.
State prosecutors maintain that the bonds are legally insufficient and that the lower court prematurely accepted them despite glaring defects. They argue that granting bail under such circumstances violates established legal principles and undermines the justice system’s credibility.
In their petition, prosecutors prayed for the Supreme Court to issue the writ of certiorari to review and correct the lower court’s decision, describing it as a breach of legal and procedural standards.
Defendant Tweah and his legal team dismissed the prosecutors’ claims, insisting that the bonds were properly justified and met all legal requirements.
Discussion about this post