Published: August 23, 2026
Dear Editor,
From a legal, constitutional, and socio-political standpoint, the arrest, detention, and formal charging of former Vice President Jewel Howard-Taylor simply emanating from ”A wired phone call from a fugitive American informant” is with overwhelming evidence, proof beyond all reasonable doubts, and an absolutely very clear and convincing evidence that the arrest and prosecution, and jailing of Madam Jewel Howard Taylor former First Lady, and immediate past Vice President is an ANTI-LEGAL METHODOLOGICAL CONDUCT OF THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE AND THE LIBERIA NATIONAL POLICE; hence, an abusive, ulawwful, unconstitutional selective, and politically motivated exercise of state power.
1. Violation of the Constitutional Presumption of Innocence & Due Process
Under Article 20(a) and Article 21(h) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, every accused person is guaranteed due process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of competent jurisdiction.
- Preemptive Arrest and Public Stigmatization: Intercepting a former Vice President at Roberts International Airport and detaining her at police headquarters prior to presenting formal, prima facie physical evidence in court serves as an administrative punishment before trial.
- Inversion of the Burden of Proof: Imputing direct criminal liability for multi-million-dollar transnational trafficking (Controlled Drug and Substance Act of 2023) based on past contacts or international meetings (such as the cited 2022 Dubai encounter) substitutes association for direct criminal intent (mens rea) and overt acts (actus reus).
2. Selective Enforcement and the Doctrine of Equal Protection
Under Article 11(c) of the Liberian Constitution, all persons are equal before the law and entitled to equal protection. The principle of non-discriminatory prosecution is violated when the state exercises selective enforcement:
3. Procedural Flaws and Constructive Scapegoating
- Charging Foreign Nationals In Absentia to Create a Network: Charging foreign operatives (Ivancic, Vrovac, Zadereiko) in absentia allows the Ministry of Justice to construct a narrative of a “transnational syndicate” without producing the primary suspects in court to face cross-examination. Tying a domestic political opponent to non-custodial foreign defendants leaves the state’s narrative unchallenged by direct testimony.
- Overcharging as a Weapon of Intimidation: Stacking high-tier, non-bailable, or heavy-bond statutory charges—ranging from drug trafficking under the 2023 Act to Money Laundering and Penal Law conspiracy—is a classic prosecutorial strategy used to force compliance, restrict movement, and damage political standing before trial.
4. Political Diversion & Narrative Management
The timing of high-profile arrests often serves a political function. In public administration theory, when a government faces severe international and domestic pressure regarding its own handling of security, systemic corruption, and economic stagnation, executing a sensational arrest of a prominent opposition figure shifts public focus:
- Deflecting International Scrutiny: By arresting a high-profile former official, the administration attempts to demonstrate “anti-narcotics zeal” to foreign partners (US DEA, European law enforcement) while keeping the core administrative and security networks surrounding current governance unexamined.
- Neutralizing Opposition Strength: Applying severe felony indictments effectively neutralizes key political figures, restricting their mobility and branding them as “cartel associates” in the court of public opinion before a single piece of forensic evidence is vetted by a jury.
The arrest of former Vice President Howard-Taylor—when evaluated against the immunity granted to current political figures linked to similar allegations—demonstrates procedural asymmetry, arbitrary state power, and a primary intent to manage public narrative rather than enforce impartial justice.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jacob Doe
Discussion about this post