Liberia: PUL Demands Proof Over Drug Claims

The Liberian media and national security establishments are on a collision course after the Press Union of Liberia (PUL) issued a 72-hour ultimatum to the Boakai administration to publicly substantiate explosive allegations that drug trafficking organizations infiltrated sections of the media to manipulate public reporting on the country’s largest-ever cocaine investigation.

The Inspector General of Police Gregory O.W. Coleman said on Thursday, July 30, that state security investigators had verified that international drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) had “infused money into the media” to change public narratives and obstruct ongoing investigations.

The claim, made during a nationally televised security briefing, has now evolved beyond a disagreement over evidence into a broader debate about press freedom, institutional accountability, government transparency and the responsibilities of law enforcement in a democratic society.

Providing updates on the investigation into the seizure of nearly four metric tons of cocaine valued at more than US$370 million, Coleman warned that the enormous financial resources available to international drug trafficking organizations made attempts to influence public opinion almost inevitable.

Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines

“We’ve been able to verify and establish that they have infused money into the media to change the narrative, distract the key players in the investigation, and just sow a serious seed of discord,” Coleman said during the government briefing.

Given the magnitude of the Duazon cocaine case — already regarded as one of the largest narcotics seizures — the allegation immediately drew national attention.

However, the Police IG did not identify any journalist, media institution, financial transaction or specific evidence linking any media practitioner to the alleged bribery scheme.

That omission has become the central issue.

The Press Union Responds

Within hours, the Press Union of Liberia responded with one of its strongest institutional statements in recent years.

The Union described the allegation as “reckless,” “dangerous” and a blanket indictment of journalism in Liberia.” It demanded that the government either publish evidence identifying those allegedly involved or face unspecified actions aimed at defending the integrity of Liberia’s independent press.

PUL President Julius Kanubah argued that allegations of criminal conduct made from an official government platform cannot remain unsubstantiated.

“The police IG, having made this grave claim, is under obligation to reveal the names of members of the drug cartel and the media allegedly involved in such pay-to-play transactions at the detriment of the public interest and the security of Liberia,” Kanubah declared.

The Union further questioned why authorities had not arrested or prosecuted any journalists if investigators genuinely possessed evidence of criminal collaboration with drug trafficking organizations.

For the PUL, the issue extends beyond institutional reputation.

Blanket allegations against the media, it argues, could expose journalists to intimidation, erode public confidence in independent reporting and weaken democratic accountability.

During the same briefing, Information Minister Jerolinmek Piah attempted to narrow Coleman’s remarks by clarifying that the Inspector General had not intended to accuse the Liberian media as a whole.

Coleman accepted the clarification.

The Press Union, however, argues that the clarification failed to resolve the underlying issue.

According to the Union, if only specific individuals were implicated, then the government bears the responsibility of naming them rather than leaving the entire profession under suspicion.

“Evidence Strengthens the Press”

Veteran journalist and media development expert Samuka V. Konneh adopted a more nuanced position.

Rather than dismissing the Inspector General’s allegation outright, Konneh welcomed the possibility that corrupt journalists should indeed be exposed–provided credible evidence exists.

“We aren’t vexed with the IG accusations. The accusation is good. We just want him to help us with evidence of his claim so we can know and shame the bad apples among us,” Konneh wrote.

He argued that bribery is itself a criminal offense under Liberian law.

Consequently, if investigators possess evidence that journalists accepted money from organized criminal networks, they have both a legal and moral obligation to prosecute them.

Konneh’s position reflects an important distinction.

Rather than defending journalists unconditionally, he insists that the credibility of both law enforcement and the media depend upon transparency.

His argument suggests that exposing corrupt journalists would actually strengthen — not weaken — the integrity of the profession.

Conversely, unsupported allegations risk undermining public confidence in both institutions simultaneously.

Several media practitioners’ positions on the matter expand that argument considerably. Through their social media posts, they frame the controversy as a test of institutional accountability.

Their central argument is stark — if Coleman has indeed verified criminal bribery involving journalists, then prosecution should follow immediately. If he cannot produce evidence, the allegation should be withdrawn.

“There is no third possibility,” one of them said. The journalists’ arguments go further by placing the Inspector General’s allegations alongside unresolved questions surrounding the ongoing cocaine investigation itself.

Several senior police officers — including highway patrol commanders, criminal investigators and intelligence personnel — have already been arrested or charged in connection with the cocaine case.

Against that backdrop, the media practitioners argue that institutional credibility begins within the police service before accusations are directed outward. Their strongest argument concerns consistency.

It is observed that many of the investigative details now publicly discussed by the government — including arrests involving senior security officers and questions surrounding seized cash — initially emerged through independent journalism rather than official disclosures.

As such journalists repeatedly filled information gaps created by delayed government communication. From that perspective, media scrutiny did not obstruct investigations. It enhanced public accountability.

They believe that investigative journalism should not be portrayed as interference merely because it asks difficult questions of public officials.

The Police IG’s controversial statement raises broader questions extending well beyond the current cocaine investigation.

Democratic governments have a legitimate responsibility to investigate corruption, foreign influence and criminal infiltration wherever credible evidence exists — including within the media.

Likewise, journalists have an equally important responsibility to report accurately and ethically.

Should evidence emerge that any journalist accepted money from organized criminal networks, such conduct would represent not only professional misconduct but potentially criminal behavior deserving prosecution.

At the same time, accusations against the press carry particular sensitivity.

Unlike ordinary political criticism, allegations of collaboration with international drug cartels can expose journalists to reputational damage, security risks and diminished public trust.

For that reason, democratic societies generally expect such claims to be supported by compelling evidence.

Ultimately, the dispute is no longer solely about Gregory Coleman’s statement.

It has become a test of two institutions central to the country’s democracy — for the LNP, the issue is whether allegations made from the authority of the state are supported by verifiable evidence — while for the PUL, the challenge is demonstrating that the profession welcomes accountability while defending journalists from unsupported collective accusations.

Samuka Konneh’s intervention perhaps captures that balance most effectively.

He does not ask the government to abandon the allegation. He asks to prove it.

If corrupt journalists exist, he argues, they should be identified, prosecuted and removed from the profession.

If they do not, the integrity of Liberia’s independent media deserves equal protection.