The balance between investigative confidentiality and public transparency remains a persistent challenge in contemporary law enforcement, particularly in high-profile drug trafficking investigations. This article examines how the management of confidential information influences public trust and perceptions of institutional legitimacy, using the Liberia Drug Enforcement Agency’s (LDEA) handling of the US$19.2 million cocaine seizure at Roberts International Airport (RIA) as a case study. Initially, the LDEA withheld the identities of suspects, citing the need to protect ongoing investigative integrity and prevent compromise of intelligence-led operations. This decision generated public debate over transparency and accountability in drug enforcement practices. However, a subsequent development in which the Ministry of Justice named multiple persons of interest and confirmed that additional arrests may follow reframes the case as a phased disclosure process within an active and expanding investigation. Drawing on Procedural Justice Theory and Institutional Legitimacy Theory, the study employs a qualitative case study approach based on document analysis, media reports, policy statements, and relevant scholarly literature. The analysis demonstrates that while investigative confidentiality is operationally necessary in complex transnational drug cases, public trust and legitimacy are highly sensitive to the timing, consistency, and clarity of institutional communication. Inadequate or delayed explanation of confidentiality decisions can generate perceptions of opacity and selective justice, even where subsequent disclosures suggest ongoing accountability and prosecutorial intent. The article argues that law enforcement agencies can strengthen public confidence by adopting structured, transparent, and phased communication strategies that balance investigative imperatives with democratic accountability. The findings contribute to broader debates on policing, governance, and criminal justice reform in emerging democracies, highlighting that legitimacy is shaped not only by enforcement outcomes but also by how investigative information is managed and communicated over time.