Sinoe County Senator and former prosecutor Cllr. Augustine Chea has raised alarm over what he describes as “arbitrary selective policing,” warning that unequal arrest standards in two recent sexual-offence cases threaten the credibility of Liberia’s justice system.
According to Senator Chea, the rule of law depends on the consistent and impartial application of legal standards.
He said when similar criminal allegations are treated differently by law-enforcement authorities, public confidence is shaken and constitutional guarantees are placed at serious risk.
The Senator’s concerns stem from the Liberia National Police’s handling of two high-profile sexual-offence cases that have ignited public debate over whether evidentiary standards are being applied consistently or selectively.
The first case involves suspended Deputy Minister of Youth and Sports, J. Bryant McGill, who was accused of raping a 16-year-old girl.
Police authorities declined to arrest or detain McGill, publicly citing the absence of DNA evidence.
On Monday, January 12, 2026, Police Inspector General Col. Gregory O. W. Coleman, speaking at a press conference, announced that McGill had been cleared of the allegation—a determination that has raised fresh questions about the investigative process and the legal standard applied.
The second case concerns Peter Bonor Jallah, Jr., the now-dismissed Deputy Director of the National Security Agency, who was accused of sodomizing a 16-year-old boy.
In that matter, police arrested, detained, and charged Jallah with statutory rape (sodomy), gang rape, and kidnapping, despite the acknowledged absence of DNA or other forensic evidence.
The stark contrast between the two cases has fueled accusations of arbitrary and selective policing.
Senator Chea, a former prosecutor and legal expert, argued that Liberian criminal law does not require DNA evidence as a precondition for arrest. According to him, under the Criminal Procedure Law, police are empowered to arrest a suspect where there is reasonable suspicion or probable cause that an offence has been committed.
He emphasized that this legal threshold is distinct from the higher standard of proof required at trial.
The Sinoe County lawmaker further noted that victim statements, witness accounts, medical reports, and surrounding circumstances may lawfully establish probable cause.
“While DNA evidence is often crucial and strongly encouraged, it is not a statutory requirement at the arrest stage,” he asserted.
Against this legal backdrop, Senator Chea argued that police reliance on the absence of DNA evidence to justify non-arrest in one case—while proceeding without it in another—reflects an uneven and potentially unlawful exercise of discretion.
Such inconsistency, he contended, undermines Article 11(c) of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and Article 20(a), which protects personal liberty and due process.
Cllr. Chea emphasized that the issue is not whether DNA evidence should be pursued.
“It should be collected wherever possible, particularly in sexual-offence investigations. The concern, rather, is whether police actions are guided by uniform legal standards or influenced by the status of the accused,” he said.
While police were legally justified in arresting and charging Peter Bonor Jallah, Jr. based on reasonable suspicion, Senator Chea questioned why the same standard was not applied in the case of J. Bryant McGill. The decision to clear McGill without a detailed public explanation of the evidentiary basis has further intensified public scrutiny.
For many Liberians, the message conveyed by these contrasting actions is deeply troubling.
Treating DNA evidence as indispensable in some cases but optional in others risks eroding trust in law enforcement and weakening confidence in the rule of law.
Until arrest and detention standards are applied consistently and transparently, questions will persist.
As Senator Chea and other legal experts stress, justice must not only be done—it must be seen to be done, without fear or favor.
