The Accra High Court has adjourned the trial of former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei-Boateng, to August 25, 2026, pending the determination of an injunction application before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the application on August 20. The application seeks to restrain the High Court from proceeding with the case during the legal vacation.
Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga said although the filing of an injunction application did not automatically suspend proceedings, he was reluctant to continue with a trial that a superior court had been asked to restrain.
He subsequently adjourned the case to August 25 at 9:30 a.m.
Defence Seeks Adjournment
The case was called on Monday, August 17, with Peter Osei-Asamoah holding brief for the substantive defence counsel, Samuel Atta Akyea.
Mr Osei-Asamoah asked the court to adjourn the proceedings, explaining that Mr Atta Akyea had written to the court on August 14 indicating that other professional commitments prevented him from appearing during the legal vacation.
He argued that the request was necessary to ensure the accused persons received adequate legal representation, as guaranteed under the 1992 Constitution.
The Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, opposed the application.
He argued that the reason cited by Mr Atta Akyea was similar to that contained in a letter submitted to the Chief Justice and did not explain why other lawyers from his firm could not represent the accused persons.
Dr Srem-Sai also reminded the court that it had previously directed that the trial should continue during the legal vacation.
He maintained that counsel could not determine the pace of judicial proceedings from the Bar and urged the court to dismiss the request.
Supreme Court Injunction
The defence subsequently drew the court’s attention to the injunction application pending before the Supreme Court.
Mr Osei-Asamoah explained that the application specifically sought to prevent the High Court from conducting the trial during the legal vacation and was scheduled for hearing on August 20.
He clarified that the defence was not suggesting that the Supreme Court had already issued an order restraining the High Court.
Rather, he asked the court to hold the proceedings in abeyance until the Supreme Court had determined the application.
Dr Srem-Sai disagreed, arguing that the mere filing of an injunction application did not deprive the High Court of its jurisdiction.
He said an injunction would only take effect after the Supreme Court had made an order.
The Deputy Attorney-General further argued that challenges to the propriety of proceedings before a lower court should ordinarily be pursued through appropriate judicial review procedures, including applications for certiorari or prohibition.
Judge Exercises Caution
In his ruling, Justice Achibonga rejected the defence’s request to adjourn the case to the next legal term.
He said such an adjournment would push the proceedings into October and undermine the purpose for which he had been appointed a vacation judge.
The judge also noted that the absence of Mr Atta Akyea did not necessarily prevent other lawyers within his firm from representing the accused persons.
On the pending Supreme Court application, however, Justice Achibonga took a more cautious position.
He acknowledged the prosecution’s argument that filing an injunction does not automatically stay proceedings. However, he said a lower court should exercise caution when a superior court has been asked to restrain it from continuing with a matter.
Justice Achibonga therefore held that, while the injunction application remained pending before the Supreme Court, he was unable to proceed with the trial.
The case was consequently adjourned to August 25, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.
Charges Against Adu-Boahene and Wife
Kwabena Adu-Boahene and Angela Adjei-Boateng are standing trial over the alleged diversion of GH¢49.1 million intended for the procurement of a cyber-defence system.
Mr Adu-Boahene has pleaded not guilty to charges including defrauding by false pretences, wilfully causing financial loss to the state, using public office for personal gain and obtaining public property by false pretences.
His wife has also pleaded not guilty to charges including allegedly collaborating to use public office for personal gain, conspiracy to commit money laundering and money laundering.
The next significant development in the case is expected on August 20, when the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the injunction application.
