Lawyers representing the Chairperson of the National Electoral Commission (NEC), Mrs. Davidetta Browne Lassanah in the case of conflict of interest, corruption and insider-trading brought against her by the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) have filed a motion to dismiss indictment.
They argued in court that the alleged crime of insider trading has never been enacted into law and that the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the case.
According to documents filed with the Criminal Court A at the Temple of Justice on Tuesday, March 8, 2022, and sworn by an affidavit copies of which are in possession of The Analyst, the lawyers listed several reasons why the case should be dismissed. They also showed justification under cited provisions why the court, in the first place, lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the case.
The Petition states: “And now comes movant, in the above entitled case of action and most respectfully request your honor and this Honorable court to dismiss the indictment against movant and for legal and factual reasons showeth the following reasons:
“Because movant say that she was charged and indicted for the alleged crime of insider trading in violation of part II, Section 2.2(Acts of corruption) of the Act of 2005 establishing the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission which said section 2.2 provides: Act of Corruption, bribery, embezzlement, extortion, fraud, influence peddling, insider trading, misuse of expressed public property and vested authority and any economic and financial crimes, which are now provided under the penal code of Liberia or may hereafter be defined and enacted.”
Providing more details on why the case should be dismissed, the lawyers listed seven other reasons among which were “Because Movant says that the alleged crime of insider trading has not been enacted into law and has not been penalized under our statutory laws and therefore, movant cannot and should not be made to plead to the alleged crime of insider trading. Movant says that the alleged crime of insider trading having not been enacted into law and penalized under statutory laws, this court has not jurisdiction of the subject matter (insider trading) of the action, section 11.26(1) of ILCLR at page 118.
The motion said further: “Because Movant says that she was also charged and indicted for violation of the code conduct (conflict of interest) relative; use of office for private interest and disclosure of interest which are violations of section 1.3, 6, 13.21, 9.6 and 9.11 of a national code of conduct for all public officials and employees of the government of the Republic of Liberia approved March 31, 2014 and printed into hand bill on June 20th, 2014.
“Because movant further says that part XII of code of conduct provides: the creation of the office of ombudsman, subsection 12.1 provides: the office of an ombudsman is hereby established as an independent autonomous body which shall be responsible for the enforcement oversight, monitoring and evaluation of the adherence to the code of conduct.”
The motion for dismissal of the indictment which was in response to the case filed by the government through the Ministry of Justice after the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission had indicted the head of the electoral umpire further went ahead with additional counts and read
“Because movant says that section 12.2 of part XII of the Code of Conduct provides “The office of ombudsman shall receive and investigate all complaints in respect to the adherence to the code of conduct. In the case where there is a determination of guilt and violation of the code by private and public officials and employees of government, said violation shall be submitted by the ombudsman to the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission(LACC) or other relevant agencies of government. The office of the ombudsman shall be responsible to collaborate with the three branches of government and civil society organization in order to develop regulation for the code of conduct.
“Because Movant says that this court lacks jurisdiction of her person and the thing (violation of the code of conduct) involved in this action (Section 11.2(1)(b) and because of the violation of part XII section 12.2 and the conduct by the respondent”, it was revealed from the document.
Two of the last reasons why the motion should be dismissed read, “Because movant said that the code of conduct provides for its own disciplinary processes in the event where there is an infringement/breach of the code in part XIV section 14.1 also because movant says that the sanctions for any breach of the code of conduct is provided for in part XV section 15.6 of the code of conduct, hence this court has no jurisdiction of the person and the thing involved in the section. There the indictment should and must be dismissed in keeping with law.
“Because movant says the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission violated part XVI section 16.1 when it took upon itself to accept a complaint of an alleged violation of the code of conduct to conduct an investigation and submitted its alleged illegal investigative findings and conclusion to the Ministry of Justice for prosecution. Because of the violation of the code of conduct by the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), the indictment should and must be dismissed”, the motion concluded.
The motion which was signed by five lawyers from the Sayeh and Sayeh Law Firm, said against the background of what was catalogued with respect to dismissing the indictment, they were making four demands, including, “that the court lacks jurisdiction of her person and the thing (violation of code of conduct involved in this action (see section 11.2(1b) and because of the violation of part XII section 12.2 of the code of conduct by the respondent”.
“That the LACC violated part XVI section 16.1 when it took upon itself to accept a complaint of an alleged violation of code of conduct, to conduct an investigation and submitted the alleged investigation findings and conclusion to the Ministry of Justice for prosecution.
“That the alleged crime of insider trading has not been enacted into law and has not been penalized under our statutory laws and therefore cannot and should not be made to plead to the alleged crime of insider trading.
“Grant unto the movant any and all further relief as your honor will deem legal and equitable in such”, the demands concluded
With the response from the defense lawyers, it is believed that all will now be set for commencement of trial of the Chairperson of the National Elections Commission who has come under heated criticism in the wake of the indictment from the LACC.
Comments are closed.