A-G must withdraw Adu-Boahene case — Parties Without Representation in Parliament demands

The Parties Without Representation in Parliament (PWREP) is demanding the Attorney-General Dr. Dominic Ayine to immediately withdraw the ongoing prosecution of former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, describing the case as “legally shaky, strategically reckless, and a waste of judicial resources.”

At a press conference at the Ghana International Press Center on Tuesday, September 30, 2025, themed “The ORAL Committee Report, Attorney General — Unfinished Cases, Delays & Unanswered Questions”, the group, led by General Secretary of the Liberal Party of Ghana (LPG), Jerry Owusu Appauh, and General Secretary of Great Consolidated Popular Party (GCPP), Citizen Ato Dadzie, argued that the prosecution of Adu-Boahene was not only baseless but also risked compromising Ghana’s national security.

*Moral obligation*

PWREP stressed that their moral obligation “to ensure accountability and transparency in governance,” warning that President Mahama’s anti-corruption fight risked being undermined by selective justice and politically motivated prosecutions.

Referring directly to the Adu-Boahene trial, they declared: “We find the continuous public commentary and media trial by the Attorney-General on the ongoing prosecution of the former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau (NSB), Kwabena Adu-Boahene, to be both unlawful and improper. The Attorney-General’s duty is straightforward: to prosecute the Adu-Boahene case in court, not in the media.”

*Prejudicing*

The group accused Dr. Ayine of prejudicing the judicial process, adding: “By making premature pronouncements and passing judgment in the public space, the Attorney-General risks undermining the integrity of the judicial process… Justice must be served in the courtroom, not in the court of public opinion.”

PWREP’s added: “We, therefore, demand that the Attorney-General must withdraw the Republic vs Kwabena Adu Boahene case from court, as the evidence clearly shows that investigations were shoddy and incomplete. Pursuing a weak case not only wastes the court’s time but also exposes the AG’s office to public ridicule.”

*Contradiction*

The group also cited a major contradiction at the heart of the prosecution. While the Attorney-General told the court on record that “no cybersecurity system of the description in the January 30, 2020, contract was ever received by the Bureau of National Communications or by its successor agency the National Signals Bureau or by the Government of Ghana,” the Israeli supplier, International Security Consulting Holding Ltd. (ISC Holding), had officially confirmed delivery.

*ISC Holding letter*

In a letter dated May 28, 2025, addressed to Adu-Boahene’s lead counsel, ISC Holding stated: “We hereby declare and for the avoidance of any doubt that: all Cyber defence systems, procured by the NSB, supplied under a confidential agreement signed on January 30th 2020, with an associated continuing service covenant, were fully delivered to Ghana’s National Security.”

PWREP stressed that this revelation “strikes at the very heart of the Attorney-General’s case,” adding that ISC Holding was “not a fly-by-night entity” but a seasoned global supplier of defence and intelligence solutions.

The group further warned of the dangerous national security implications of the trial: “The most troubling aspect of this matter is that it could easily have been resolved outside court. The supplier has confirmed delivery. The National Security outfit is reportedly using the very system to track IP addresses of dissenting voices… Already, through media sensationalism, the public has been given more information than is prudent about the system: its cost, its contractual origins, and now conflicting claims about its delivery. In the intelligence world, such information is gold.”

They cautioned that putting such a sensitive security system on public trial could weaken its effectiveness, arguing: “Should a system designed to defend the Republic from cyber threats be laid bare in open court for partisan political gain? Should the credibility of our intelligence operations be jeopardised merely to satisfy a narrative of anti-corruption crusading?”

*Justice system*

PWREP insisted: “Ghana cannot afford a justice system that sacrifices fairness for politics, nor can we afford an Attorney-General who gambles with national security for optics. The Adu-Boahene trial is not just about one man — it is about the credibility of our justice system, the sanctity of due process, and the safeguarding of sensitive state security infrastructure.”

They urged the Attorney-General to “re-evaluate his posture” and bring the matter to a close, warning that continuing with the prosecution would “erode trust, endanger security, and weaken our Republic.”

They added: “Ghana deserves better. The people deserve justice. And the future demands nothing less.”