Monrovia — A ruling by Criminal Court “C” at the Temple of Justice has spotlighted systemic weaknesses in prosecutorial discipline, after the court dismissed an indictment against former National Oil Company of Liberia (NOCAL) Chief Executive Officer, Rustolyn Suacoco Dennis, and co-defendant Richman Jallah.
In a decision delivered on March 17, 2026, Assigned Circuit Judge Ousman F. Feika anchored his ruling on a fundamental principle of criminal justice: the timely prosecution of accused persons. The court found that the Government of Liberia failed to commence trial within the timeframe mandated by law, thereby violating the defendants’ constitutional rights.
At the core of the ruling is Chapter 18, Section 18.2 of Liberia’s Criminal Procedure Law, which obligates the state to proceed with trial within a defined statutory period. The defendants, through an eight-count motion filed on February 9, 2026, argued that the prosecution had effectively abandoned its duty by allowing two successive court terms to lapse without meaningful action.
The court agreed with this position, interpreting the delay not as an administrative oversight but as a substantive breach of due process. Judge Feika emphasized that once an indictment is returned and served, the burden rests squarely on the prosecution to diligently move the case forward—not on the defendants to trigger proceedings.
The defense further demonstrated that the prolonged indictment imposed tangible restrictions on their liberties, including limitations on international travel for medical care, business engagements, and family responsibilities. These constraints, the court acknowledged, undermined both the presumption of innocence and the defendants’ constitutional right to freedom of movement.
In its resistance, the prosecution conceded the delay but attempted to deflect responsibility, arguing that the defendants failed to request docketing or assignment of the case. State lawyers also cited the court’s congested docket—particularly high volumes of drug and theft cases—as a contributing factor. However, the court dismissed these arguments as legally insufficient, reinforcing that institutional inefficiencies cannot override constitutional guarantees.
Crucially, the ruling sends a broader message about accountability within Liberia’s criminal justice system: procedural timelines are not optional, and failure to adhere to them carries decisive consequences. While the dismissal was issued “without prejudice”—allowing the state the option to refile charges—the immediate effect is a clear judicial rebuke of prosecutorial inertia.
The court ordered that the defendants be fully discharged from the charges and that their constitutional rights be restored, effectively resetting their legal status.
Beyond the individuals involved, the case underscores a recurring structural issue: the tension between limited judicial capacity and the non-negotiable requirement of due process. Judge Feika’s decision reaffirms that where this tension arises, the Constitution must prevail.
