High Court rejects bid to remove prosecution submissions in Adu-Boahene trial

The High Court in Accra has dismissed an application by former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two co-accused seeking to strike out portions of the prosecution’s written submissions in their ongoing criminal trial. Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga ruled that it was not the court’s duty to investigate whether lawyers’ written submissions accurately reflected trial evidence.

Rev DK Odei-Appiah, convener of the Coalition of Civil Society Organisations, described allegations that prosecutors misrepresented evidence as “very serious” and said they must be examined carefully. He spoke at a press conference at the Ghana International Press Centre in Accra on 27 October 2026.

“There is a world of difference between submissions based on inferences grounded in the adduced evidence and submissions based on evidence that did not exist.”

Defence counsel Samuel Atta Akyea challenged parts of the prosecution’s submissions filed on 9 October 2026, opposing the accused persons’ submission of no case to answer. He questioned whether statements attributed to prosecution witnesses appear in the official record of proceedings and sought orders for disputed passages to be expunged.

The defence argued that the prosecution introduced materials unsupported by the record and attributed statements to witnesses who had not made them during testimony. It also accused prosecutors of misrepresenting the contents of an exhibit in a manner said to contravene court rules, evidence law and professional ethics.

Rev Odei-Appiah said the allegations should not be dismissed without examination, but must not be treated as proven misconduct before both sides are heard and the record reviewed. He urged the judge to determine the application independently, without political pressure, intimidation or improper influence.

The coalition also cautioned against using allegations against individual officials to condemn the entire National Security establishment. Rev Odei-Appiah said any response to proven misconduct must follow the law and applicable disciplinary procedures.

The court held that where counsel believes an opposing lawyer misrepresented evidence, the appropriate course is to draw the court’s attention to the alleged inaccuracies. The application was dismissed, leaving the prosecution’s submissions in place.