LACC Prosecutors Under Pressure As Commission Admits Setbacks In High-Profile Corruption Cases

By Amos Harris

The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission has acknowledged growing challenges in its fight against corruption as the Commission convened a one-day Quarterly Review Session for prosecutors amid mounting public concerns over the effectiveness of corruption prosecutions in Liberia.

Held on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, at the Commission’s headquarters on Old Road in Monrovia

The review session was organized under the theme, “Widening the Horizon for Effective Prosecution,” a move many observers see as an indication that the country’s anti-graft institution is struggling to secure consistent courtroom victories in major corruption cases.

The gathering brought together prosecutors and legal practitioners of the Commission to assess weaknesses within the prosecution division and discuss strategies aimed at improving the handling of corruption-related cases before Liberian courts.

Speaking during the opening session, the Executive Chairperson of the LACC, Alexandra K. Zoe, stressed the urgent need for prosecutors to upgrade their legal skills in response to what she described as increasingly sophisticated corruption schemes across the country.

Cllr. Zoe admitted that the fight against corruption is becoming more complex and warned that the success or failure of the Commission largely depends on the technical competence and preparedness of its prosecutors.

 Her remarks come at a time when public confidence in the country’s anti-corruption drive remains under scrutiny due to delays, dismissals, and mixed outcomes in several high-profile corruption cases.

She also reflected on the recent Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) corruption trial, praising the collaboration between the LACC prosecution team and the Ministry of Justice.

 However, her comments appeared to acknowledge disappointment within the Commission over the final outcome of the case.

According to Cllr. Zoe, although the Commission did not obtain all the convictions it had hoped for, securing three guilty verdicts out of five defendants was still considered a partial achievement in the ongoing effort to hold public officials accountable for corruption-related offenses.

The admission has reignited debate over the effectiveness of Liberia’s anti-corruption prosecution strategy, with critics arguing that repeated setbacks in major cases continue to weaken public trust in the government’s anti-graft agenda.

Legal experts at the session focused heavily on courtroom weaknesses that often undermine corruption prosecutions. 

His Honor Judge Ousman Feika led discussions on case management and effective courtroom trial techniques, cautioning prosecutors about poor preparation, weak evidence presentation, and procedural errors that frequently affect criminal trials.

Judge Feika reportedly emphasized that successful prosecutions are built on disciplined organization, clear presentation of facts, and careful handling of legal procedures from indictment to appeal. 

He also warned prosecutors against technical mistakes that could allow defendants to escape accountability.

Meanwhile, Cllr. M. Wilkins Wright focused on the appeal process, highlighting how legal missteps and procedural oversights can reverse months of prosecutorial work and undermine public confidence in the justice system.

For his part, Cllr. Tiawan S. Gongloe challenged prosecutors to build stronger, evidence-based indictments, stressing that weak case files remain one of the major reasons corruption cases collapse in court.

Participants at the session also engaged in frank discussions with Oversight Commissioners about the day-to-day difficulties facing prosecutors, including legal bottlenecks, limited resources, and institutional pressure associated with handling politically sensitive corruption cases.

The review session comes as Liberia continues to face increasing calls from civil society organizations and international partners to strengthen transparency, improve accountability mechanisms, and aggressively prosecute public corruption without fear or political interference.

Despite repeated by successive governments to combat corruption, critics maintain that convictions involving senior public officials remain rare, while lengthy court proceedings and inconsistent prosecution strategies continue to frustrate anti-corruption efforts across the country.