The Accra High Court has set July 3 to rule on a motion by lawyers of the embattled former Director of the National Signals Bureau, Kwabena Adu Boahene, regarding the disclosure of all national security coordinators’ operational accounts.
Lawyers of Kwabena Adu-Boahene, led by Samuel Atta Akyea, on Thursday, June 26, indicated to the court that they had filed a motion for further disclosures on June 23 and prayed to the court to move same since they had already served the Attorney-General’s Office.
In the motion filed by the Defence lawyers, they are requesting the details of the National Security Coordinators’ operational accounts from 1992 to date, which entails the tenures of five Presidents.
The accounts consist of the governments of Presidents Rawlings (1992 to 2001), Kufuor (2001 to 2009), Atta Mills (2009 to 2012), Mahama (2012 to 2017), Akufo-Addo (2017 to 2025) and Mahama (2025 to date).
Samuel Atta Akyea argued that the AG had disclosed matters that border on national security to advance their case and had left out some details, hence their motion.
“Relating to a very unfortunate dimension to what the AG filed, which is the National Security Coordinator’s Special Operations account, the AG is comfortable divulging national security matters to advance the prosecution of this case.
“By reason of the authorities already known that disclosures at the behest of the prosecution must of necessity include all that is exculpatory of the accused persons and it is not the pleasure of the AG to decide which of the disclosures are palatable to him and those which are not.
“Baffoe Bonnie case and the practice direction spells it out and the operative word is -shall- which means mandatory.” Atta Akyea noted.
But Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem Sai, leading the prosecution, opposed the motion, citing irrelevance to the case against the former National Signals Bureau Director.
He argued that the case against Kwabena Adu Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor and the company bordered on the allegation that they had moved funds from a particular government account into a private company, which they had incorporated within a particular period.
“The law remains clear, which is that evidence must be relevant. Section 51 of the Evidence Act has made it very emphatic that no evidence is admissible except relevant evidence.
“The practice direction, which regulates disclosures, made it clear that evidence which will warrant disclosures must satisfy two conditions
“First, it must be relevant; second, it must be evidence which is in the exclusive possession of the prosecution.
“The duty of counsel for the defence is to show your Lordship that each of the documents which they listed on the face of the motion is relevant.
“Relevancy simply means that the material should aid in the resolution of the matters before the court.
“Whether the charges, together with the WS we’ve filed show that the accused persons are guilty of the offences they’ve been charged with.
Srem Sai further noted that the defence lawyers declined the opportunity when they were asked to file their disclosures and urged the court to dismiss the motion.
Justice Eugene Nyadu Nyantei then adjourned the proceedings to July 3 to rule on the motion filed by the lawyers of Kwabena Adu Boahene.
Kwabena Adu Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor and Advantage Solutions Limited are facing 11 counts of conspiracy to commit crime, stealing, using public office for profit, money laundering and causing financial loss to the state.
They have all pleaded not guilty and are on bail.
