The ongoing trial of former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, has sparked renewed discussion about prosecutorial du
The ongoing trial of former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, has sparked renewed discussion about prosecutorial duties and evidence disclosure in the criminal justice system.
Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem Sai has clarified recent changes to the law that require prosecutors to provide comprehensive evidence to accused persons, emphasizing both procedural fairness and limits on abuse of the disclosure process.
Legal Framework for Disclosure
According to Srem Sai, prosecutors are legally obligated to disclose all evidence collected during investigations, not only that which supports a conviction but also evidence that may aid the accused in establishing their innocence.
This requirement, he explains, is central to ensuring fair trials and upholding constitutional rights.
However, he cautions that accused persons cannot misuse the disclosure process to delay proceedings or transform the prosecutor into their personal defence counsel.
“There are clear limits to what an accused can request from further disclosures,” Sai noted, stressing the balance between transparency and judicial efficiency.
He highlights that prior to 29 October 2025, when the Supreme Court ruled in The Republic v Adu-Boahene, courts relied on two key principles:
1. Relevance Rule: Evidence requested had to relate to proving guilt or innocence.
2. Possession Rule: Evidence must have been obtained by investigators during the probe of the specific offence.
The Adu-Boahene ruling fundamentally altered this approach. Under the new framework, the relevance of evidence will now be determined at trial, rather than as a precondition for disclosure.
Accused persons only need to demonstrate that the evidence exists in investigators’ possession.
Implications for the Adu-Boahene Trial
This legal shift directly affects Adu-Boahene’s defence strategy. While the Attorney-General, Dr. Dominic Ayine, has maintained that no cybersecurity system procured under the January 2020 contract was delivered, the Israeli firm I.S.C Holding Ltd. has confirmed full delivery of the system.
Sai emphasizes that, under the disclosure rules, such evidence must be shared with the accused, allowing Adu-Boahene to fully exercise his defence rights.
He explained that the Supreme Court’s ruling ensures fairness without obstructing justice: “The law is clear. Prosecutors must facilitate the accused’s defence, but this does not mean they become the defence. It ensures the trial is fair while preventing abuse of the disclosure process.”
Balancing Justice and Accountability
Deputy AG Sai’s clarification comes at a critical juncture in a politically sensitive case, where public scrutiny, national security concerns, and allegations of financial mismanagement intersect.
COMMENTS