By Staff Writer
—-Filed Judge Complaint Before Supreme Court
The Government of Liberia through its state prosecutors has filed with the Supreme Court Justice in chambers Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay a legal complaint against Judge A. Blamo Dixon of Criminal Court “C” accusing the judge of being biased in handling a landmark corruption case involving five high profile government officials of former President George Weah.
State prosecutors in a petition for the issuance of the Writ of Certiorari against Judge Dixon said the Judge manifested bias in handling the case when he granted bail to the former government officials on personal recognizance, although the ex-officials did not make an application, it was evident that the criminal appearance bonds as filed were defective and did not meet the requirements of law.
The defendants in the case include Samuel Tweah, Former Minister of Finance and Development Planning, Cllr. Nyenati Tuan, Former Acting Minister of Justice, Stanley S. Ford, Former Director of the Financial Intelligence Agency, D. Moses P. Cooper, former comptroller of the Financial Intelligence Agency, and Jefferson Karmon, former national security advisor. The former officials are 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.
The officials individually filed various bonds using properties that did not meet the statutory requirements. The state said, in keeping with the law, it filed an exception to the validity of each of the various property bonds that were filed by the defendants. The defendants in response to Petitioner’s Exception to their bonds, filed a motion to justify their bonds.
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 was announced, the respondent surety was sworn and put on the witness stand, where he testified on direct examination that the properties he proffered into bonds for the Movants/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.
He 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.
Prosecution said 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.
According to prosecution, after cross examination of the defendants’ surety, the judge, 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 the defendants.
After the reading, the judge 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 the 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.
The judge, His Honor A. Blamo Dixon, without regards to his duty of cool neutrality as referee, granted the defendants’ Motion to Justify, amidst a litany of defects on the individual and collective bonds of the defendants-another factual and legal reason for this Petition for the Writ of Certiorari to be issued against the judge and defendants in the name of justice and fair play.
The state argued 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, the judge had a duty to testify to the authenticity and veracity of its communication regarding the property valuation bond presented by the defendants; a duty he ignored and failed to exercise.
Prosecution said upon these arguments and counter arguments, the Judge, 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.
