Kwabena Adu Boahene loses bid to strike out submissions in GH‵49.1m trial

A High Court in Accra has dismissed an application filed by Kwabena Adu Boahene, the former Director General of the National Signals Bureau, which sought to strike out specific portions of the Attorney General’s submissions. Presiding judge Justice Achibonga ruled that the court will rely exclusively on the evidence and testimony presented throughout the trial rather than external commentary or disputes regarding the attribution of statements. The ruling comes as the legal proceedings involving the alleged theft of GH₵49.1 million enter a critical stage.

The prosecution has officially rested its case after calling four witnesses to testify. In response, the defense has filed a submission of ‘no case to answer,’ arguing that the state has failed to provide sufficient evidence to warrant a full defense from Adu Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng. The defense team maintains that the prosecution’s narrative regarding the missing funds cannot be sustained by the facts presented in court so far.

Central to the defense's argument is the claim that the financial transactions in question were authorized by the late National Security Coordinator. They contend that because the coordinator is deceased, the prosecution lacks the necessary testimony to prove the transactions were unauthorized or that the procurement of cybersecurity equipment was fictitious. Furthermore, the defense has challenged the assertion that luxury assets owned by the accused were purchased using the allegedly stolen GH₵49.1 million, stating that the prosecution has failed to establish a direct link between the assets and the funds.

Regarding Angela Adjei Boateng, the defense argues that there is no proof linking her to any criminal activity or demonstrating that she had knowledge of any alleged wrongdoing by her husband. The court's upcoming decision on the ‘no case to answer’ submission will determine whether the charges will be dismissed or if the trial will proceed with the defense opening its case to explain their side of the procurement and financial history.