The High Court has dismissed an application by former National Signals Bureau Director Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two others seeking to strike out portions of the prosecution’s response to their submission of no case.
Lawyers for Adu-Boahene led by Samuel Atta Akyea, argued that the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, had introduced material that was not supported by the evidence on record and attributed statements to witnesses who had not made them during the trial.
He also accused the prosecution of presenting the contents of an exhibit in a manner he said was inconsistent with the rules of evidence and professional ethics.
According to Atta Akyea allowing the disputed statements to remain unchallenged could mislead the court and result in a miscarriage of justice towards his clients.
He therefore urged the court to protect the integrity of the judicial record and prevent the prosecution from introducing material not supported by the evidence through written submissions.
The prosecution led by Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, however, opposed the application. He argued that the court had no jurisdiction to expunge portions of a lawyer’s written submission merely because the opposing party disputed their accuracy.
He maintained that the court was entitled to examine the evidence already on record without requiring the prosecution to file an affidavit in opposition to the defence’s allegations.
The Deputy Attorney-General maintained that the proper course was for the court to evaluate the competing submissions against the evidence and determine whether the accused persons had a case to answer.
He described the application as an attempt to delay proceedings and urged the court to dismiss it.
After hearing arguments from both counsel Justice Francis held that written submissions are intended to assist or persuade a judge on the law and the facts but cannot substitute for evidence presented during a trial.
He noted that a lawyer could make representations or misrepresentations about the evidence in a written address, but said such statements would not determine the outcome of the case.
He maintained that the judge must rely on the evidence given by witnesses and exhibits properly admitted into evidence when deciding the matter.
The court further stated that where one party believes opposing counsel has relied on non-existent evidence, the appropriate response is to draw the court’s attention to the alleged misrepresentation.
A submission of no case is an application by the defence asking the court to determine that the prosecution has not presented sufficient evidence to require the accused persons to open their defence.
With this decision, the court will now give its ruling on the submission of no case on November 5 to determine whether Kwabena Adu-Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng will have to mount the witness box and open their defence against the charges preferred against them.
High Court accepts ‘omitted’ bank statements of Kwabena Adu Boahene as evidence
