
Mary Broh: Liberia Court Grants Nolle Prosequi in Rice Trial
Summary
- Former GSA Director-General Mary T. Broh had all charges dropped in the `Mary Broh rice trial nolle prosequi Liberia` case.
- The Liberian government filed a `nolle prosequi` application, granted by Judge Ousman F. Feika under Chapter 18, Section 18.1 of Liberia's Criminal Procedure Law.
- Broh was among 13 former officials accused of diverting 25,054 bags of Saudi-donated rice, valued at approximately US$425,918.
- The dismissal occurred as a 15-member jury was finalized, with the trial for the remaining defendants set to proceed on August 19.
- The decision comes amid public debate over the government's handling of high-profile prosecutions involving public officials.
Charges Dropped for Former GSA Head Mary Broh
The Liberian government's prosecution team successfully applied for a `nolle prosequi`, a legal action to discontinue proceedings, which was granted by Criminal Court "C" Assigned Judge Ousman F. Feika on Tuesday.
Former General Services Agency (GSA) Director-General Mary T. Broh has been formally cleared of all charges in the high-profile criminal trial concerning the alleged diversion of rice donated to Liberia by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Liberian government's prosecution team successfully applied for a `nolle prosequi`, a legal action to discontinue proceedings, which was granted by Criminal Court "C" Assigned Judge Ousman F. Feika on Tuesday. This decision effectively removes Ms. Broh from the case, allowing the trial to proceed solely against the remaining defendants.
Judge Feika's ruling came on the same day the court finalized the selection of a 15-member jury, composed of nine women and six men, paving the way for the substantive trial to commence on Wednesday, August 19. The prosecution's application for `nolle prosequi` was reportedly filed on July 3, 2025, and the court affirmed that the State acted within its legal authority under Chapter 18, Section 18.1 of Liberia's Criminal Procedure Law. Following the dismissal, the Clerk of Court was instructed to return Ms. Broh's criminal appearance bond, or its monetary equivalent, and officially expunge her name from the case records.
Ms. Broh was initially among 13 former government officials indicted in connection with the alleged scheme to divert and misuse the humanitarian aid. All 13 defendants had entered pleas of not guilty when they were arraigned before Criminal Court "C" on Monday, August 17. While Ms. Broh is now free of the charges, her co-defendants continue to face serious accusations, including theft of property, economic sabotage, misuse and illegal disbursement of public funds, misapplication of entrusted property, abuse of office, and criminal conspiracy.
Allegations of Rice Diversion and Co-Defendants
The indictment at the heart of the `Liberia public officials criminal trial` details the alleged diversion of a significant quantity of rice intended for the Liberian populace. According to prosecutors, Liberia received a total of 29,412 bags of 25-kilogram rice from Saudi Arabia in 2023. However, it is alleged that 25,054 of these bags, with an estimated value of US$425,918, were improperly diverted through unauthorized transfers and distributions, rather than reaching their intended beneficiaries.
Beyond `GSA Director-General Mary Broh charges`, the list of indicted individuals includes several other prominent former officials. These are former Foreign Minister Dee-Maxwell Saah Kemayah, former Internal Affairs Minister Varney A. Sirleaf, and former Deputy Foreign Minister for Administration Thelma E. Sawyer. Also implicated are former National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) officials Augustine Tamba, Augustine M. Kollie, Henry O. Williams, Edward S. Konneh, and Archievego M. Doe.
Further defendants include former GSA officials Edris Bility and Mamie Davies, former Deputy Internal Affairs Minister for Administration Momolu Johnson, and former NDMA Logistics Officer Rosetta L. Gbassay Bowah. Prosecutors contend that many of the accused participated in critical meetings and decisions regarding the handling of the `Saudi Arabia donated rice diversion Liberia` and, in doing so, exceeded their official mandates in determining the transfer and distribution of the humanitarian commodity.
Legal Context and Public Scrutiny
The application of `nolle prosequi Liberia criminal cases` in Ms. Broh's trial highlights a key aspect of prosecutorial discretion under `Liberia Criminal Procedure Law Section 18.1`. This legal provision grants the State the authority to withdraw charges, a power that Judge Feika affirmed was properly exercised in this instance. The decision to drop charges against a high-profile former official like Ms. Broh has drawn attention, particularly as it unfolds amidst ongoing public discourse regarding the government's approach to prosecuting current and former public officials.
This specific prosecutorial action follows another notable instance involving Montserrado County District #5 Representative Priscilla Cooper in the Capitol Building arson case, which has similarly sparked questions among critics concerning the consistency and fairness in the prosecution of major criminal cases involving public figures. Such developments underscore the complexities and public interest surrounding legal proceedings against those who have held positions of power.
In related procedural matters during Tuesday's court session, prosecutors presented approximately 90 exhibits as part of the discovery process. Defense attorneys, however, voiced concerns over certain documents they claimed were either missing or illegible. In response, Judge Feika mandated the prosecution to furnish clearer copies of the disputed documents, along with the Grand Jury transcript. The court also formally acknowledged an amended indictment submitted by the prosecution, ordering its inclusion in the official court record.
Practical Implications
Lawyers should note the application of nolle prosequi under Liberia's Criminal Procedure Law, specifically Chapter 18, Section 18.1, as it demonstrates prosecutorial discretion in high-profile cases involving public officials and can inform defense strategies or client advisories regarding potential case dismissals.
Source
How does this affect you?
Get an AI analysis of this article grounded in your jurisdictions, practice areas, and any policy documents you've uploaded to Wansom.
Wansom is AI and can make mistakes.
