The High Court in Accra has granted a six-day ultimatum to the former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau (NSB), Kwabena Adu-Boahene, and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, to produce their lawyers for the trial to proceed on hAugust 17.
The court said should they fail to secure the presence of their lawyers on that date, they would be compelled to conduct the cross-examination of the fourth prosecution witness themselves.
Justice Francis Apangabonu Achibonga, a Justice of the Court of Appeal sitting as an additional High Court judge, also said should they fail to conduct the cross-examination themselves, the witness would be discharged.
On Tuesday, August 11, 2026, the former Director-General of the NSB, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, arrived at the High Court in Accra for the continuation of their trial without lawyers.
The Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai led state prosecutors which includes Sarah Fafa Kpodo, a Chief State Attorney, Esi Dentaa Yankah, a Principal State Attorney and Rabiatu Abdulai, Assistant Staff Officer of EOCO.
However, lawyers for the accused persons, led by Samuel Atta Akyea, were absent from the day’s proceedings, which was scheduled for the continuation of the further cross-examination of the fourth prosecution witness.
The absence of the defence team was because they had earlier written to the Chief Justice indicating that they would be unable to attend proceedings during the legal vacation.
Adu-Boahene, the first accused person, urged the court to indulge them with an opportunity to get their lawyers, as he was unable to reach them prior to the court sitting.
Frank Marshall Cromwell, an investigator with the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and the last witness for the prosecution, was also present in court awaiting the case to be called.
The accused persons — Adu-Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, and Advantage Solutions — are facing eleven counts, including stealing GH¢49.1 million meant for a cyber security defence system. They have pleaded not guilty and have been granted bail.
Adu-Boahene’s Challenge
While addressing the court on Tuesday about the whereabouts of his lawyers led by Samuel Atta Akyea, the first accused, Adu-Boahene, said, “It’s been quite a challenge reaching him this morning.”[Tuesday]
“As recently as this past weekend, I am aware that a few of them have been included in script marking outside Accra,” he said. “For the lead counsel [Atta Akyea], I am not sure if he is even in the jurisdiction.”
He said, “If you will kindly indulge us, we will try to resolve the issue with them.”
Power resides with Chief Justice
Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, while on his feet, said, “We are aware, and I have spoken to counsel who was categorical that he had written a letter to the Chief Justice, this court’s registrar, and the Ghana Bar Association that he would exercise his alleged right to not attend court proceedings during the vacation.”
According to him, “The power to determine whether or not court proceedings will be held during the legal vacation resides with the Chief Justice, and where the Chief Justice directs, subject to the inherent power of the judge to control proceedings in his court, this is supported by Order 75 Rule 4 which sets out the period for legal vacation and subject to those periods to Order 72 Rule 1(1).”
Dr. Srem-Sai submitted that it is the Chief Justice who determines whether there should be proceedings during the vacation.
“We are not aware of any law, rule, practice, or convention which allows a lawyer or a group of lawyers for that matter to decide whether there should be proceedings in court or not.”
“If a lawyer has a genuine reason to absent himself from court or to have the proceedings adjourned, what we know at the Bar is that the lawyer would make a prayer to the court for the court to grant such accommodation on a case-by-case basis, in which case the court may either grant the prayer in part, in whole, or dismiss same entirely,” he submitted.
“Whatever case it may be, it remains the province of the judge alone to determine whether there should be proceedings, having obtained a warrant to sit during the vacation.”
“Accordingly, we pray that proceedings be allowed to continue without hindrance,” he prayed.
By Court
Justice Francis Apangabonu Achibonga, a Justice of the Court of Appeal who is presiding over the case as a High Court judge, said the accused persons deserve an opportunity to put their house in order.
The court said, “Counsel for the accused persons was present when the suit was adjourned to today [August 11] through to 13 August 2026, yet counsel is absent without any reason.”
“I, however, note that counsel by letter dated 5th August 2026 has written to the Chief Justice praying that the Chief Justice’s directive to sit during the legal vacation be reconsidered,” the court said.
“It has also come to my attention that the Ghana Bar Association, by a letter dated 10th August 2026, which letter is in the court’s docket addressed to the Chief Justice, is raising concerns about the court sitting during the legal vacation.”
“All I can do as a trial judge is to take note of the said letters, as the same do not amount to a stay of proceedings in this suit. As indicated on the last date, having been issued a warrant by the Chief Justice to sit during the legal vacation and to conduct hearings, until the said warrant is revoked, I am mandated to continue to sit as a vacation judge and conduct hearings,” the court said.
“I therefore intend to continue to sit and to conduct hearings during the legal vacation until the warrant authorising me to sit is revoked.”
“I note that the accused persons are present in court even though their lawyers failed to attend court today.”
“The question to ask is, would it be fair to the accused persons if I decided to proceed today and asked them to continue with the cross-examination of PW4 [Fourth Prosecution Witness]? I do not think so.”
“In my view, even if counsel had abandoned their clients, it is only fair and proper to give the client an opportunity to advise himself or herself so as to enable court business to continue undistracted.”
“In this case, therefore, I shall indulge the accused persons with an adjournment to enable them to advise themselves as to the future conduct of this case with regard to their legal representation.”
“If by the next date [August 17] the accused are not represented by counsel, they shall be made to cross-examine the witness themselves, failing which PW4 would be discharged,” the court directed.
The case has been adjourned to August 17, 2026, for continuation.
