Adu-Boahene trial must be decided on evidence, not public pressure – CSOs

A coalition of civil society organisations has called for the protection of the judge presiding over the criminal trial of former National Signals Bureau director Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two others from political pressure and other forms of improper influence. The coalition, convened by Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, said Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga must be allowed to determine the case independently, without intimidation or public pressure to deliver a particular outcome. Speaking at a press conference at the Ghana International Press Centre in Accra on Tuesday, October 27, 2026, Rev. Odei-Appiah said the coalition’s intervention was intended to protect judicial independence, the presumption of innocence and public confidence in Ghana’s criminal justice system. The coalition comprises SMART Generation Governance Hub (SMARTGENZ), OmanGh Interest Advocates, the Alliance of Pastors for Social and Moral Development, and Agenda for Security and Social Systems. “Our interest is justice, not a predetermined outcome,” Rev. Odei-Appiah said, stressing that the coalition was not seeking to influence the court towards either a conviction or an acquittal. He maintained that the prosecution must prove its case with credible evidence, the defence must receive the protections guaranteed under the law, and the judge must determine the matter in accordance with the evidence and applicable legal principles. Coalition questions public commentary on allegations Rev. Odei-Appiah expressed concern about the public presentation of allegations against Adu-Boahene and his wife by the Attorney-General in March 2025. He recalled claims that Adu-Boahene had acquired more than 50 houses in locations including Accra, Oyarifa, Kumasi and London, alongside allegations that approximately GH¢49.1 million had gone missing from the Bureau of National Communications. He argued that the seriousness of the allegations should not be allowed to create the impression that guilt had already been established before the conclusion of the trial. “A criminal prosecution must not become a public conviction before it becomes a judicial determination,” he said. The convener urged public officials and political actors to exercise restraint when commenting on pending criminal cases, emphasising that allegations must be distinguished from findings established in court. No-case submission at centre of proceedings The coalition also addressed the trial’s current stage, following the prosecution’s conclusion of its case and the defence’s submission of no case to answer. The defence has challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution, while the prosecution has filed a response for consideration by the court. Rev. Odei-Appiah said the coalition was not seeking to determine whether the evidence met the legal threshold for the case to proceed. That decision, he stressed, rests with the court. He nevertheless raised questions about reported testimony concerning the alleged loss of funds, including whether an official of the National Security establishment had testified to lodging a complaint. He also referred to reported testimony from the Head of Finance, who was said to have indicated that she would have known if funds had gone missing, as well as evidence concerning a departmental budget of GH¢13.8 million in 2020 and the reported absence of an audit report identifying the alleged loss. The coalition said these issues required careful consideration of the court record and the evidence presented. Rev. Odei-Appiah cautioned that the observations should not be interpreted as a judicial finding that the prosecution had failed to establish its case. “The prosecution must be judged by the evidence it has presented, not by the seriousness of the allegations it announced at the beginning of the case,” he said. He added that the court must assess whether the evidence establishes the alleged unlawful diversion of public funds and connects each accused person to the offences charged. Defence challenges prosecution submissions The coalition also raised concerns about a defence application reportedly challenging portions of the prosecution’s written submissions opposing the no-case application. According to Rev. Odei-Appiah, defence counsel Samuel Atta Akyea has questioned whether some statements attributed to prosecution witnesses in the written submissions are reflected in the court record. The defence is reportedly seeking orders to have the disputed portions removed from the submissions. Rev. Odei-Appiah said the State Attorney representing the Attorney-General’s Department had indicated that the prosecution would not file an affidavit in opposition but would instead argue on points of law. He said the court had adjourned the application to Thursday, October 29, 2026. The coalition stressed that the defence’s claims remain subject to judicial determination and urged the court to resolve the application by reference to the record of proceedings and the applicable law. It said accurate representation of witness testimony was fundamental to the integrity of criminal proceedings, adding that written submissions must analyse the evidence without misrepresenting what witnesses had said. Any question of professional responsibility, it argued, should be addressed through the appropriate legal and disciplinary procedures. Calls for restraint and prosecutorial accountability The coalition urged the President, members of the Executive, political party officials and other public officeholders to refrain from conduct that could influence, or appear to influence, the outcome of the trial. It also called on the Attorney-General’s Department to ensure that its written submissions accurately reflect the evidence on record and uphold the highest standards of prosecutorial responsibility. Rev. Odei-Appiah said accountability within national security institutions was important but cautioned against attributing institutional wrongdoing solely on the basis of allegations against individuals. He argued that criminal responsibility must be established through evidence linking each accused person to the alleged conduct. “Ghana’s security institutions must be subject to the law, but they must not be condemned by association,” he said. Coalition invokes constitutional protections Rev. Odei-Appiah invoked Articles 125 and 127 of the 1992 Constitution, which address judicial power and safeguards for judicial independence. He said these provisions were essential to ensuring that judicial decisions were based on the law and evidence rather than political interests or public pressure. The coalition urged Justice Achibonga to determine all applications and issues before him independently, while calling on the parties to respect the court’s authority and the legal process. It also urged media organisations, political parties and commentators to distinguish legitimate public scrutiny from attempts to dictate the outcome of a pending case. “The public interest is not served by a conviction secured at any cost, nor by an acquittal unsupported by the law. It is served when the judicial process is fair, impartial and credible,” Rev. Odei-Appiah said. He reiterated that the coalition was not calling for the acquittal or conviction of the accused persons but for a process in which the prosecution, defence and court each fulfil their responsibilities under the law. “Our message to the Government is clear: respect the judicial process. Our message to the prosecution is clear: let the evidence speak. Our message to the Judiciary is clear: determine the matter independently, in accordance with the law,” he said.