AG’s case against Adu-Boahene shaky

The defence team for former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene is challenging the Attorney-General’s case in the controversial cybersecurity software trial, insisting that the prosecution must establish the essential ingredients of the offences charged before the accused persons can be called upon to open their defence.

The legal battle has intensified following the filing of the Attorney-General’s written opposition to the accused persons’ submission of no case to answer, a procedural application asking the court to determine whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to require them to defend themselves.

The prosecution, in its submission dated October 9, 2026, maintains that the evidence presented during the trial establishes a prima facie case against Adu-Boahene and his co-accused, Angela Adjei Boateng and Advantage Solutions Limited. It is urging the court to dismiss their application and require them to open their defence.

However, the defence, represented by lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea, has challenged the prosecution’s position through its submission of no case, putting the sufficiency and interpretation of the evidence at the centre of the dispute.

The court is scheduled to deliver its ruling on Thursday, November 5, 2026, after both sides filed their respective processes.

The GH¢49.1 million transaction at the centre of the case

According to the Attorney-General’s submission, the prosecution’s case centres on three cheques totalling GH¢49.1 million, which it alleges were improperly transferred from a Fidelity Bank account associated with the Bureau of National Communications (BNC) to a private account linked to Advantage Solutions Limited at UMB.

The prosecution argues that the transactions, carried out in February and March 2020, demonstrate the alleged misappropriation of public funds and form the foundation of several criminal charges against the accused persons.

The document identifies Adu-Boahene as the first accused person, Angela Adjei Boateng as the second accused person, and Advantage Solutions Limited as the third accused person. It further alleges that the private company was used as the receiving entity for the funds in question.

The prosecution relies on bank records, cheque images, account-opening documents and testimony from witnesses to support its position that the money was transferred and subsequently used for purposes unrelated to the intended cybersecurity project.

However, the existence of the transactions and the prosecution’s interpretation of them are not, by themselves, equivalent to a judicial determination of criminal liability. The question before the court at this stage is whether the evidence satisfies the legal threshold for the accused persons to be required to answer the charges.

Defence challenges the prosecution’s reliance on documentary evidence

A major point of contention is the Attorney-General’s assertion that the accused persons’ cross-examination of prosecution witnesses was “extraordinarily tangential” and failed to undermine the essential documentary evidence.

The prosecution maintains that its documentary evidence remained intact throughout the trial and that the defence did not sufficiently challenge the material facts supporting the charges.

But the defence’s submission of no case places the legal sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence before the court. Under the applicable legal principles cited in the Attorney-General’s own submission, a no-case application requires the court to consider whether the prosecution has established the essential ingredients of the offences charged and whether the evidence is sufficiently credible to justify calling upon the accused persons to defend themselves.

The prosecution’s document itself acknowledges that the mere presentation of evidence touching on an alleged offence does not automatically settle the question. It cites judicial authorities emphasising that evidence must be assessed against the essential elements of the charge and the applicable standard governing a submission of no case.