Justice in chamber, Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, has temporarily suspended proceedings trial of former Finance and Development Planning Minister Samuel Tweah, former Acting Minister of Justice, Nyenati Tuan, former Director of Financial Intelligence Agency, Stanley S. Ford, former Comptroller Financial Intelligence Agency, Moses P. Cooper and former National Security Advisor Jefferson Karmoh, following a request from government lawyers for a petition for Writ of Certiorari. In a notice signed by Supreme Court Clerk, Cllr. Sam Mamulu, the parties involved have been summoned to a conference with Justice Gbeisay on December 10, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. The notice also instructed the lower court to halt all proceedings until the conference’s outcome. “By directive of His Honor Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, Sr., Associate Justice presiding in Chambers, you are hereby cited to a conference with His Honor on Tuesday, December 10, 2024, at the hour of 10:00 a.m. in connection with the above-captioned case. Meanwhile, you are ordered to stay all further proceedings and/or actions in the matter pending the outcome of the conference,” the notice read. The Prosecution argues that Judge Blamo A. Dixon manifested bias when he granted bail to the defendants on personal recognizance, although the defendants’ lawyers did not make an application therefore and, as the defendants surety agreed, it was evident that the Criminal Appearance Bonds as filed by defendants was defective and did not meet the requirement of law.
The Prosecution stated that the defendants are inductees accused of the commission of the crimes of Economic Sabotage, Misuse of Public Money and/or Record, Illegal Disbursement of Public Money, Theft of Property, Criminal Facilitation and Criminal Conspiracy by the Republic of Liberia through the Ministry of Justice. They indicated that individually filed various bonds using properties that did not meet the statutory requirements. Petitioner, in keeping with law, filed exception to the validity of each of the various property bonds that were filed by defendants. The government lawyers said the defendants in response to Petitioner’s Exception to their bonds, filed a motion to justify their bonds. That on the scheduled day for the hearing of the justification of the bonds filed for and on behalf of the defendants, after representation of the parties were announced, defendants surety was sworn and put on the witness’ stand, where he testified on direct examination that the properties he proffered into bonds for the Defendants were given to him by the owners of said properties to apply them for the purpose of bond as he may deem fit, as has been applied for the surety for the defendants. Prosecution stated that the surety testified further that the monetary value as inscribed in the various title deeds of the proffered bonds were genuine and authentic in fact and law; emphasizing that the government of Liberia was aware of their existence by means of the probation, registration and tax payments done for the properties to LRA. That notwithstanding the surety confirming that two of the properties used as bond had one and the same property identification number (an anomaly) and that the properties were tax delinquent or were indebted to the Government of Liberia, thereby creating tax-lien on the subject properties, thus, the legal ground for the disqualification of the surety’s proffered bonds raised by Petitioner, which became glaring and conspicuous; and thereupon the bond was rendered unworthy to stand as surety in these criminal proceedings-the basis and ground for Petitioner’s Petition for the issuance of the Writ of Certiorari. That after Petitioner’s cross examination of defendants surety, 1st Respondent, of his own accord, ordered the Clerk of Court to read in open court, a communication from LRA that was issued as a result of Petitioner’s request for LRA to verify the surety’s tax payment for the properties proffered as bond for 2nd Respondents/Defendants. After the reading, 1stRespondent used the same letter to cross the surety as to the validity of the asserted qualms raised in said letter to which the surety argued of not been served with the letter notwithstanding, the service of said letter on 2nd Respondents/Defendants’ counsels on which basis Movants/Defendants moved the Court to justify the bond, without care about the tax-lien on the properties as detailed in LRA communication. 1st Respondent His Honor A. Blamo Dixon, without regards to his duty of cool neutrality as referee, granted 2ndRespondents’ Motion to Justify, amidst a litany of defects on the individual and collective bonds of 2nd Respondents-another factual and legal reason for this Petition for the Writ of Certiorari to be issued against 1st and 2nd Respondents in the name of justice and fair play. That in respect of the Communication from the Liberia Revenue Authority that some of the property proffered as bond were not in the system of the Government of Liberia, while the rest had very significant unpaid taxes accessed against them, 1st Respondent had a duty to testify to the authenticity and veracity of its communication regarding the property valuation bond presented by 2nd Respondents; a duty he ignored and failed to exercise. That upon these arguments and counter arguments, the Judge, in person of the 1stRespondent ruled that the Movants/Defendants were entitled to bond even though they failed to proffer the proper and adequate bond which they failed to make sufficient.
Comments are closed.