The House of Representatives on Tuesday unanimously reaffirmed a fundamental legal principle in criminal jurisprudence, underscoring that the burden of proof in criminal proceedings rests with the State and not the accused, as deliberations continue on the proposed National Anti-Corruption Court legislation.
The motion was proffered by Montserrado County District #16 Representative Dixon Seeboe, following a broader discussion triggered by a communication from Representative Kerkula Muka Kamara of Montserrado County District #14.
Rep. Kamara had sought clarification and further legislative scrutiny of Section 5 of Title 17(a) of the Liberian Code of Laws Revised, which forms part of the legal framework for the proposed court.
Lawmakers, in their deliberations, emphasized the long-established doctrine of criminal justice rooted in constitutional and common law traditions, which holds that an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and that the prosecution bears the responsibility of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Parliamentary observers noted that the clarification forms part of the Legislature's oversight and law-making responsibilities, aimed at ensuring that proposed statutes align with constitutional due process guarantees and established principles of criminal law.
Lawmakers further indicated that the reaffirmation is intended to strengthen the legislative intent of the bill and ensure that the proposed Anti-Corruption Court operates within acceptable legal and procedural safeguards consistent with both national and international fair trial standards.
Rep. Kamara's communication is expected to be forwarded to relevant committees for detailed legislative review, technical assessment, and possible recommendations before a final report is presented to plenary.
The proposed National Anti-Corruption Court forms part of wider judicial reform efforts aimed at strengthening accountability mechanisms, improving the prosecution of corruption-related offenses, and enhancing public confidence in Liberia's justice system through stronger institutional oversight.
Meanwhile, the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) has raised strong constitutional concerns regarding certain provisions in the proposed reforms, particularly those relating to the shifting of the burden of proof in corruption-related cases.
LACC Chairperson, Cllr. Alexandra K. Zoe stated that while the Commission supports new legislation designed to combat illicit enrichment, it strongly objects to provisions that may undermine constitutional protections against self-incrimination.
She referenced Articles 20(A) and 21(b) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, warning that any statutory provisions contradicting these safeguards could be struck down by the Supreme Court.
According to her, maintaining a balance between effective anti-corruption enforcement and the protection of accused persons' rights is essential to ensuring both justice and constitutional compliance.
"While the Commission welcomes the removal of statutes of limitations and the criminalization of illicit enrichment, we are concerned that shifting the burden of proof to the defendant may violate constitutional protections against self-incrimination. The primary objective is to balance aggressive anti-corruption measures with constitutional rights such as the right to a speedy trial," she argued.
Cllr. Zoe further warned that failure to align the proposed laws with the Constitution could ultimately weaken anti-corruption efforts rather than strengthen them.
She also expressed concern over provisions related to the removal of LACC officials, arguing that such measures could undermine the independence of the Commission if left vulnerable to executive discretion.
"In my opinion, this will weaken the fight against corruption. If we are investigating the Executive and the same Executive can remove us at will, then due process protections become insufficient," she added.
The LACC Chair further disclosed that the Commission had raised these concerns during the drafting stage, but some of the provisions were retained by the Law Reform Commission.
In response, Chairperson of the Law Reform Commission, Cllr. Bornor Varmah, defended the proposed reforms, stating that they are intended to strengthen accountability and address systemic corruption.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
He explained that the reforms aim to require public officials to account for wealth significantly beyond their lawful earnings, with the State first establishing a financial disparity before requiring an explanation from the accused.
According to him, the objective is to deter abuse of office, strengthen transparency, and improve investor confidence by reinforcing the rule of law.
"These measures aim to deter systemic abuse of office and restore public trust, while positioning Liberia as a transparent destination for foreign direct investment," he noted.
Cllr. Varmah further argued that the reforms would enhance prosecution of corruption-related offenses and empower the State to pursue offenders more effectively.
He also clarified that while the proposed amendments provide grounds for the removal of LACC officials for cause--including incapacity and corruption--such actions must still follow due legal process.
Under current law, the statute of limitations for criminal offenses is five years, while misdemeanors carry a three-year limitation period.
