By Grace Zigah
A new legal showdown is unfolding in the high-profile criminal case involving National Security Spy Chief, Kwabena Adu Boahene, as his defence team mounts pressure on the Attorney General’s (AG) office to fully disclose all investigative materials — including what they describe as “exculpatory evidence” omitted from the prosecution’s submissions.
At the heart of the matter is a motion filed by counsel for the accused, Samuel Atta Akyea, seeking a court order compelling the AG to release all evidence uncovered during investigations, especially details that may clear his client of wrongdoing.
The motion, which was heard in court on Thursday, June 26, argues that the bank statements disclosed by the AG are incomplete, and crucial pages are missing — omissions that, according to the defence, may contain evidence that vindicates Adu Boahene.
Exculpatory Evidence Withheld?
Atta Akyea strongly suggested that the excluded portions of the financial records are deliberately omitted because they are likely to exonerate the accused.
“It is not for the Attorney General to cherry-pick what evidence is favourable to his case and withhold the rest,” he told the court.
“The prosecution is under a legal duty to disclose all evidence, whether it implicates or clears the accused.”
The defence further requested that the court order the AG to disclose records of the National Security Operational Account dating back to 1992.
According to Atta Akyea, these records are necessary to establish a pattern of conduct relevant to Adu Boahene’s defence, although specifics on how this ties directly to the charges were not disclosed in open court.
Irrelevant and Unnecessary
In a robust response, Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem Sai pushed back against the motion, calling it both unnecessary and irrelevant.
He argued that the missing portions of the bank statements cited by the defence are from accounts owned by the accused himself, and therefore, could easily be retrieved without requiring a court order or the prosecution’s intervention.
“The defence is demanding information they already have or can obtain,” Srem Sai insisted.
He further described the request for historical national security account data as overly broad, speculative, and disconnected from the current charges against Adu Boahene.
Court to Rule in July
The presiding judge, after hearing both arguments, adjourned proceedings to Thursday, July 3, 2025, when a ruling will be delivered on the motion.
This development adds another layer of legal complexity to the ongoing Republic v. Kwabena Adu Boahene trial — a case that has drawn national interest due to its intersection of finance, governance, and security.
Adu Boahene is currently facing charges related to financial misconduct, though the full details of the prosecution’s case have not yet been made public.
The former security chief has consistently denied all allegations, maintaining that he is the victim of a mischaracterised transaction and selective prosecution.
Legal Implications and Broader Concerns
Legal analysts say this case could set a precedent on how far prosecutors must go in disclosing potentially exculpatory material under Ghanaian criminal law.
It also raises questions about the transparency of financial investigations and the protection of due process rights in politically or publicly sensitive cases.
If the court rules in favour of the defence, it could force the AG’s office to open more of its investigative files to scrutiny, potentially reshaping the direction of the trial.
Conversely, if the motion is dismissed, the defence may be forced to rely on alternate means to construct its argument — including securing its own evidence directly from financial institutions or government archives.
For now, all eyes are on July 3, when the court is expected to clarify whether the state has met its full disclosure obligations — or whether more information must come to light in the interest of justice.
