By G. Watson Richards
The ongoing economic sabotage trial involving former Finance Minister Samuel D. Tweah and several co-defendants took another turn on Wednesday, in criminal Court ‘C’ Criminal at the Temple of Justice Court, as portions of his testimony appeared to raise questions that could strengthen the prosecution’s case.
The case, filed by the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), accuses the former officials of misusing public funds, laundering money, and engaging in criminal conspiracy in connection with national security spending.
Questions Raised in Tweah’s Testimony
A closer look at the court record shows a number of areas where Tweah’s statements seem difficult to reconcile.
Secrecy vs. Accountability
Tweah told the court and jury while on the witness stand on Wednesday that national security institutions cannot disclose how funds are used.
“Those security institutions… will not reveal what they do with national security monies,” while at the same time, he insisted that the funds were properly handled.
“All national security monies… are duly accounted for under the national security structure of the government,” Tweah testified in open court.
This raises a key question: if the spending cannot be disclosed, how can it be independently verified?
No Documents, But Process Was Followed
Tweah also admitted that he did not receive formal documentation for some transactions, but released said funds.
“No request has come to me in form of source document,” he added.
Still, he maintained that the process was legitimate because it followed decisions made at the National Security Council level.
“The agreement by the National Security Council… is the trigger for spending.”
For the prosecution, the absence of paperwork is a central issue.
Limited Knowledge Despite Oversight Role
At one point, Tweah said he did not know how the funds were eventually used.
“Even me who provided the resources… I do not know what they do with their money,” he asserted.
The former Finance Minister also emphasized his long tenure and authority, while serving as Finance Minister from 2018 to 2023. “I am the longest serving Minister of Finance… I have given the most money to any security working in the Republic,” he added.
⅙That contrast could raise concerns about oversight and responsibility.
Dismissing Investigators While Citing Select Evidence
Tweah strongly rejected the findings of LACC investigators, calling them misleading, while relying on parts of statements from co-defendant Jefferson Karmoh to support his own position
“Go to the statement… not what somebody says.”
This selective approach may be something the prosecution highlights as the trial continues.
Past Practice vs. Present Scrutiny
Tweah argued that similar transactions have taken place in the past: “You may see hundreds of cheques… for national security purposes.”
However, prosecutors counter that past practices do not necessarily make current actions lawful.
No Personal Benefit Claim
Tweah insisted that neither he nor his co-defendants benefited personally from over LD $1 billion and over USD $ 500, 000 between September and October 2023.
“The prosecution have not shown any evidence that we… took government money [for personal use].”
However, the prosecution’s case appears to focus not only on personal gain but also on how the funds were handled and whether proper procedures were followed.
Inside the Courtroom
Throughout the proceedings, prosecutors frequently objected to the defense’s line of questioning, especially when it touched on LACC’s own financial practices.
In many instances, the court agreed, ruling those questions irrelevant.
Tweah, for his part, described the case as politically motivated: “This case is a political witch hunt… intended to destroy innocent families,” he lamented.
A Key Issue: Oversight
One notable moment came when Tweah acknowledged that no audit had been conducted before the investigation.
“At no time were we… ever audited at the level of the NSC before the investigation of the LACC.”
That point may become important, as the case largely revolves around whether national security spending can be both confidential and properly accounted for.
What Lies Ahead
For the jury, the central task will be to weigh whether the gaps and inconsistencies in Tweah’s testimony are reasonable given the nature of national security operations, or whether they point to wrongdoing.
The outcome of the case is likely to shape future debates around transparency and accountability in Liberia’s handling of national security funds.
The trial was adjourned and is expected to continue on Friday, April 24, 2026, at the hour of 10 a. m. with further testimony.
