Published: June 19, 2026
As public pressure grows for answers in Liberia’s US$19 million cocaine scandal, responsibility appears to be shifting from one institution to another.
The LDEA has recently argued that disclosing names could compromise its investigation, while President Joseph Boakai has referred the matter to a broader national security process.
But the president’s strategy appears more like a cover-up than any genuine effort to uncover the truth. Here’s the paradox;
The very institutions tasked with uncovering the truth are themselves suspects. There is no way a massive cartel-like operation of this magnitude with all the characteristics of a multinational drug importation and transhipment ring can occur without support from high state security officials. Customs, Seaport Police, Immigration, LNP and paramilitary support provide institutional support in drug snuggling operations. These institutions must first be compromised in a country to begin the installation of the cartel.
Money movements in banks must be instituted to avoid detection. In other words key institutions are vulnerable. That’s why these institutions must not investigate themselves.
This raises a simple but important question: Who is investigating whom?
The President recently assured Liberians that there is “No hiding place” for drug traffickers. It was a strong declaration that resonated with a public alarmed by one of the largest cocaine seizures in Liberia’s history; a seizure of approximately 2,151 kilograms valued at US$19 million, or ld$3.7 billion. By comparative calculations, that would be almost 200 bags of rice, requiring logistics, executive clearance & national security assistance to move from one point to the other.
If there is truly no hiding place for those connected to drug trafficking, as the president would have Liberians believe, then that principle must apply equally to everyone, regardless of rank, position, or political influence. This should be easy because the people in the middle of the scandal are not hiding in the forest, most of them are right under the president’s nose. Even their foreign collaborators shouldn’t be too far.
At the beginning of the investigation, LDEA Officer-in-Charge Fitzgerald T. M. Biago described the case as a transnational organized crime and stated that names could not be released because doing so could jeopardize the investigation. While that explanation may be understandable from a law-enforcement perspective, it has fueled public concern about transparency, independence, and accountability. Why? The LDEA office-in charge himself is not above suspicion and is a person of interest as you will see as follows:
Those concerns are intensified by what many see as a contrast between the cautious handling of the cocaine investigation and the speed with which conclusions appeared to be drawn in other high-profile national cases.
At the center of the current debate is Police Director Gregory Coleman.
Raising questions about Director Coleman is not a declaration of guilt. Matter-of-factly, allegations are not evidence, and suspicion is not proof. However, the credibility of any major investigation depends not only on actual impartiality but also on public confidence in that impartiality.
A significant concern arises from the institutional relationships surrounding the investigation. Fitzgerald Biago, while serving as Officer-in-Charge of the LDEA, continues to hold the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police. Public discussions and reports have also raised allegations that Director Coleman exercised influence over Biago’s appointment as Officer-in-Charge of the LDEA.
Whether those allegations are ultimately proven or disproven, they create an appearance-of-conflict of interest ssues that cannot simply be ignored.
In investigations involving potential links to senior security officials, overlapping chains of command and professional relationships can undermine public confidence, even where investigators act in complete good faith.
For that reason, Director Coleman should be suspended pending the outcome of an independent investigation.
Such a measure should not be viewed as punishment or an admission of guilt. Around the world, temporary suspension is a standard administrative safeguard used to protect both investigations and the individuals involved from allegations of interference, influence, or undue pressure.
The larger issue extends beyond any single individual.
A narcotics shipment of this magnitude raises serious questions about facilitation networks, financial arrangements, logistical support, and possible institutional failures. Liberians deserve to know who was responsible, who benefited, and who, if anyone, enabled the movement of such a significant quantity of cocaine.
These questions cannot be answered through secrecy or investigations perceived as compromised.
To restore public confidence, the Government of Liberia should consider requesting independent international assistance, including support from United States law-enforcement agencies and other credible partners experienced in investigating transnational organized crime. Such cooperation would strengthen, not weaken, confidence in the outcome.
Ultimately, this case is bigger than the cocaine seizure itself. It is a test of Liberia’s institutions and of the government’s commitment to accountability.
The public is not demanding predetermined conclusions. It is demanding a credible process, transparency, and equal application of the law. Most importantly, it is demanding assurance that no individual is beyond scrutiny because of status, office, or political connections.
President Boakai’s declaration that there is “no hiding place” for drug traffickers was an important promise. The true test of that promise will not be found in speeches, but in actions.
If there are indeed no sacred cows, then every credible lead must be pursued, every allegation properly examined, and every official—regardless of rank—subjected to the same standard of scrutiny.
That is how truth is uncovered, public trust is preserved, and the rule of law is upheld.
In our next article, we will identify another individual whose alleged role in this scandal merits serious scrutiny. We will continue to spotlight every credible lead and every person who, in our view, may be escaping proper examination. Our purpose is simple: to ensure that no suspect is shielded, no lead is ignored, and no stone is left unturned in the pursuit of truth and accountability.
The Hunt For The ‘Big Fish’ Continues..
Mulbah K. Morlu
Chairman, STAND
Monrovia, Liberia
June 18, 2026
Discussion about this post