The ongoing economic sabotage trial at Criminal Assizes “C” took a pivotal turn this week after a key prosecution witness from the Central Bank of Liberia (CBL) distanced former Finance and Development Planning Minister Samuel D. Tweah Jr. from the direct signing of major financial instruments at the heart of the case.
Testifying as the prosecution’s second subpoena witness, CBL Director of Banking William Grant Jlopleh told the court that documents presented by state lawyers did not show Tweah singlehandedly signing any of the disputed mandates.
Instead, he clarified that the financial instruments in question bore signatures from multiple Ministry of Finance officials, including then Comptroller General Janga Kowo and Deputy Minister for Fiscal Affairs Samora P. Wolokollie, consistent with standard institutional procedures. Jlopleh explained that the CBL’s involvement in the controversial transactions was strictly administrative.
The bank merely executed transfer instructions originating from the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP), involving movements from government accounts to the Financial Intelligence Agency. According to him, the CBL does not independently authenticate individual signatures beyond ensuring institutional authorization.
“Our responsibility is to process documents received from the Ministry. We do not verify who physically signs once institutional approval is established,” he testified. When pressed on whether Tweah himself signed the instruments, Jlopleh’s testimony revealed what appeared to be a gap between the former minister and the physical documentation.
He emphasized that the signatures presented to the bank reflected standard government approval channels not personal or unilateral execution. Despite the witness’s testimony, which the defense trumpeted as a major blow to the state’s efforts to tie Tweah directly to the disputed transactions, prosecutors appeared unshaken. Instead, they leaned on a broader narrative that the legality, movement, and use of the funds remain the cornerstone of their case.
A prosecution lawyer argued that whether Tweah physically signed the instruments is only one aspect, insisting that the transactions were executed under a chain of command that warrants scrutiny.
The state has repeatedly suggested that even if signatures were not individually affixed by Tweah, the transactions were carried out under his authority as Minister of Finance, a position that places ultimate responsibility on him under Liberian financial law.
Evidence Battles: Court Admits Financial Instruments Despite Objections Earlier in the hearing, the court admitted several original financial instruments and transfer documents into evidence.
The defense objected, arguing that some documents were improperly subpoenaed or existed only as photocopies. Judge Ousman Feika, however, partially overruled the objections, allowing core financial records to remain in the evidentiary pool. The prosecution also sought additional bank statements and cheque records through a subpoena duces tecum, targeting accounts linked to the FIA. Defense lawyers labeled the move a “fishing expedition,” but the court ruled that such requests fall within procedural allowances—so long as witness examinations are first exhausted.
A potentially significant revelation emerged when Jlopleh disclosed that the CBL does not retain original cheques after processing them. Instead, cheques are returned to the originating ministry along with account statements.
This could complicate efforts to trace physical signatures and may strengthen the defense’s argument that no direct evidence connects Tweah to the execution of the financial documents. The ongoing trial follows months of investigation into alleged irregular financial transactions involving the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) during the tenure of former officials in the previous administration.
Former Minister Tweah, alongside other ex-government officials, is accused of authorizing or facilitating the movement of substantial public funds outside established legal frameworks. The state argues that the transactions were improper and amounted to economic sabotage, while the defense insists the transfers followed standard government protocols and were duly approved through institutional channels.
The case forms part of a broader post-transition audit wave aimed at probing suspected financial improprieties across several ministries and agencies. As the trial progresses, the courtroom battle is increasingly shaping into a test of direct attribution versus institutional accountability. The defense is banking on the absence of proof that Tweah personally signed the mandates.
The prosecution is building a case that authority, not individual penmanship, determines culpability in public financial transactions. With additional witnesses expected to testify in the coming days, the outcome could set a significant precedent for how Liberia prosecutes financial crimes involving high-ranking public officials.
