Is the Prosecution Dodging the Case? Shifts Focus on Judge, Defense Lawyer

Published: December 23, 2024

Monrovia – State prosecutors, in a controversial move, have filed yet another writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court, accusing Criminal Court “C” Judge A. Blamo Dixon of bias and alleging defense lawyer A. Ndubusi Nwabudike is practicing without proper licensure, raising questions about their focus on the actual case against Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and co-defendants.

The writ, filed on Monday, challenges Judge Dixon’s refusal to recuse himself from the case and accuses Cllr. Nwabudike of practicing law without proper licensure from the Liberian National Bar Association (LNBA), despite a prior Supreme Court ruling reinstating him.

The prosecution argues that Judge Dixon acted improperly by denying their motion for recusal and by accepting resistance filed by Nwabudike. They claim the defense lawyer’s filing was invalid since he does not possess a license from the LNBA. Prosecutors have also criticized Judge Dixon for relying on a prior Supreme Court judgment affirming Nwabudike’s eligibility to practice law without acknowledging the LNBA’s position on his licensure status.

Furthermore, the petition accuses the judge of facilitating “unauthorized practice of law” by allowing Nwabudike to file responses in the case. They argue this violates ethical standards outlined in Rule 37 of the Code for the Moral and Ethical Conduct of Lawyers.

The prosecutors also allege that Judge Dixon’s comments during proceedings have created a perception of bias, particularly his statement questioning whether detaining defendant Samuel D. Tweah alone would strengthen the prosecution’s case. They claim this undermines the credibility of the state’s case and casts doubt on the judge’s impartiality.

Critics of the prosecution’s approach argue that the legal team appears more invested in challenging the roles of the judge and the defense lawyer than addressing the actual charges against the defendants. The repeated filings and disputes over procedural issues have overshadowed the core allegations against Tweah and others.

The petition also notes that the judge’s conduct in court, particularly his refusal to recuse himself, demonstrates an alleged inability to remain neutral. Prosecutors insist that Judge Dixon’s impartiality has been compromised and that his continued involvement in the case is prejudicial to the state’s interests.

Observers have raised concerns over the prosecution’s priorities in the case. While the defense and judicial system have come under scrutiny, questions remain as to why the prosecutors have yet to focus their energy on presenting a strong case against the defendants themselves.