Adu Boahene, Wife Score Major Victory at Court of Appeal, As AG is Ordered to Disclose Evidence Withheld or Concealed by Investigators in GH¢49.1m Case
The Court of Appeal has ordered the Attorney-General to disclose a range of documents and materials that were previously requested by former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau (NSB) Kwabena Adu Boahene and his wife in their ongoing criminal trial, in a ruling that significantly strengthens the defence’s access to evidence while allowing the substantive case to continue.
In a unanimous ruling signed by Mrs. Justice Georgina Mensah-Datsa, Justice of Appeal, and concurred in by Justice George Buadi, the Court of Appeal, on Thursday, 28th May, 2026, the appellate court allowed the interlocutory appeal filed by Adu Boahene and his spouse in most part, directing the prosecution to produce several documents and pieces of information deemed relevant to ensuring a fair trial.
The appeal arose from complaints by the appellants that the trial judge, Eugene Nyante Nyadu, had in an earlier ruling erred by blocking additional disclosures requested by the accused persons in the case of the Republic vs Kwabena Adu-Boahene and Others. The Apellants explained that the Attorney-General had concealed and persistently failed to disclose material evidence, including banking records, National Security files, and documents relating to the alleged procurement of a cyber defence system at the centre of the criminal proceedings.
The three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, presided over by Justice Georgina Mensah-Datsa with Justice George Buadi concurring, held that the prosecution bears a continuing legal obligation to disclose all relevant materials within its possession and control, or obtainable through reasonable diligence.
The appellants had invoked the appellate jurisdiction of the Court seeking, inter alia, seven (7) substantive reliefs relating principally to disclosure obligations of the prosecution, access to alleged exculpatory evidence, inspection of the purported cyber defence system, production of missing banking records, disclosure of the source and purpose of certain funds amounting to GH¢49.1 million, as well as an application for stay of proceedings.
*Consequential orders*
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in most part and subsequently directed the Attorney General to produce and disclose eighty-eight (88) missing pages of bank statements which had earlier been complained about by the appellants. The court further ordered the Attorney General to disclose details concerning the source of the GH¢49.1 million in question in order to determine whether the said monies constitute public funds.
The appellate court also directed the Attorney General to release and disclose the file of the National Security Coordinator relative to the acquisition of the said cyber defence system. In addition, the court ordered the disclosure of all bank account records linked to Kwabena Adu Boahene in connection with his tenure within the National Security apparatus. However, the court limited the disclosure period to accounts starting the year 2007, as opposed to 1992 as originally requested by the appellants.
The court further ordered full disclosure regarding the purpose for which the funds were allegedly disbursed, including whether the monies were indeed intended for the procurement and delivery of a cyber defence system.
With regard to the request for a physical inspection of the alleged National Security facility where the cyber defence system was purportedly installed, the Court of Appeal urged counsel for the appellants to properly reframe and particularize the relief sought in order to facilitate such an inspection.
The court, however, held that proceedings in the original trial should continue, as according to the ruling, disclosure in criminal proceedings is a continuing obligation and process and therefore did not justify a suspension of the ongoing trial.
The Attorney General, however, is now under a binding obligation to disclose all material evidence and relevant documents necessary for the defence of the accused persons in line with the directions of the Court of Appeal.
It is noteworthy that the Attorney General had earlier informed the trial court that the prosecution was not in possession of any land title certificates, conveyancing documents or ownership records relating to the properties allegedly acquired by Kwabena Adu Boahene in Accra, Kumasi and London, despite the fact that those properties formed part of the prosecution’s public allegations.
