Lawyers for former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu Boahen have pledged to continue their legal battle after a High Court ruling paved the way for a former co-accused person to testify for the prosecution in the ongoing GHS49 million alleged theft case.
The High Court in Accra dismissed an objection raised by defence counsel Samuel Atta Akyea against the Attorney General’s decision to withdraw charges against Mildred Donkor, the third accused in the matter.
The ruling allows Donkor, who has been discharged from the case, to serve as a prosecution witness against Adu Boahen, his wife, Angela Adjei-Boateng, and their company, Advantage Solutions Limited.
Following the court’s decision, Mr. Atta Akyea insisted that his client remained innocent and expressed confidence that the truth would eventually emerge through the legal process.
Speaking in an interview, he argued that evidence he considers important to the defence has not yet been disclosed and maintained that access to such material would strengthen his client’s case.
“We are fortified that our client is very innocent, but we will fight on,” he said, adding that his legal team would seek other avenues to obtain the information they believe is necessary for a fair defence.
The Attorney General, Dominic Ayine, withdrew the charges against Donkor under Section 59 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), after she reportedly agreed to cooperate with prosecutors and testify in the case.
The defence had challenged the procedure used by the Attorney General, arguing that such a significant development required a formal motion before the court. However, Justice John Nyadu Nyante ruled that the Attorney General acted within his constitutional authority and dismissed the objection.
The criminal case centres on allegations that approximately GHS49 million in state funds were misappropriated. Adu Boahen and the other accused persons have denied wrongdoing.
Despite the setback in court, the defence team says it remains determined to challenge aspects of the prosecution’s case and will continue pursuing legal measures aimed at securing what it describes as full disclosure of relevant evidence ahead of trial.
