The Supreme Court of Liberia, in its October Term, has delivered a significant ruling in the case involving several former top government officials who had petitioned the court for a writ of prohibition against an on-going economic sabotage case before Criminal Court “C”, Temple of Justice.
The petitioners include Samuel D. Tweah, former Minister of Finance and Development Planning; Counselor Nyenati Tuan, former Acting Minister of Justice; Stanley S. Ford, former Director of the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA); Moses P. Cooper, former Comptroller of FIA; and Jefferson Karmoh, former National Security Advisor.
They brought the petition against His Honor Roosevelt Willie, Assigned Judge of the First Judicial Circuit Criminal Assizes “C” for Montserrado County, along with the Republic of Liberia, represented through the Ministry of Justice and the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC).
The petitioners sought to prohibit the lower court from proceeding with their trial, raising claims related to statutory interpretations and alleged immunities.
The Supreme Court, after reviewing the legal arguments and relevant statutes, denied the petition for the writ of prohibition.
The court further ruled that only persons expressly named in a statute as beneficiaries can claim protection under it, meaning any claim of immunity or exclusion must be legally established.
Chief Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, speaking on behalf of the court, added that only the President of Liberia enjoys personal immunity while in office. Therefore, former officials like the petitioners cannot claim immunity in the absence of clear statutory protection.
The court further declared that ex parte applications, such as those made in this matter, must follow due legal procedures and cannot override on-going criminal proceedings unless legally justified.
As a result, the Supreme Court quashed the alternative writ earlier issued and ordered the case to be remanded to the lower court, instructing it to resume jurisdiction and continue the trial as initially planned.
“Wherefore, and in view of the foregoing, the petition for the writ of prohibition is denied, the alternative writ issued is quashed, and the peremptory writ prayed for is denied. This matter is hereby remanded to the trial court to resume jurisdiction and proceed with the trial in keeping with the law,” the Supreme Court observed in its ruling.
