Accra, Ghana – Monday, the defense in the ongoing trial of Kwabena Adu-Boahene and others rigorously questioned the third prosecution witness, Madam Mildred Donkor, regarding a series of significant bank transfers presented as evidence. The proceedings focused on transactions allegedly originating from Advantage Solutions Limited’s accounts, with specific attention paid to transfers totaling millions of Ghana Cedis purportedly directed to or linked with Mr. Adu-Boahene.
Context of the Trial
The trial involves allegations of financial impropriety, with the prosecution presenting evidence of substantial money movements. Central to the case are transactions involving Advantage Solutions Limited, a company whose financial activities are under intense scrutiny. The defense aims to dismantle the prosecution’s narrative by challenging the interpretation and validity of the financial records presented.
Cross-Examination on Key Transactions
During Monday’s cross-examination, defense counsel Samuel Atta-Akyea meticulously guided Madam Donkor through documents detailing specific bank transfers. A transaction dated July 9, 2018, involving GH¢1.7 million, was highlighted. Madam Donkor confirmed that the document indicated this sum was transferred in favor of Mr. Adu-Boahene.
Further scrutiny was applied to a December 3, 2018, transaction of GH¢402,000. The witness acknowledged that this amount also appeared on the presented documents, linked to an account associated with Mr. Adu-Boahene.
Mr. Atta-Akyea posited that such transfers, if executed by the bank, would logically appear in Mr. Adu-Boahene’s personal accounts. Madam Donkor, however, maintained her position that the transactions were processed based on instructions she received, and crucially, that the bank itself generated the account statements, not her.
She elaborated that entries and subsequent statements were the bank’s output, generated after her superiors’ instructions were acted upon. The defense referred to specific entries within Exhibit 7, which reflected both the GH¢1.7 million and the GH¢402,000 credit transactions, and the witness confirmed their presence on the document.
Dispute Over Document Interpretation
A point of contention arose when the defense drew attention to a transfer of GH¢1,650,000 to Fidelity Bank, intended for the Director of BNC Communications Bureau Limited. Madam Donkor confirmed this document also indicated a “high value transfer” to Fidelity Bank, linked to Mr. Adu-Boahene.
Disagreements surfaced between the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, representing the prosecution, and the defense over the interpretation of document excerpts. The prosecution objected to a line of questioning, characterizing it as witness “harassment.” Mr. Atta-Akyea countered, asserting his right to pursue the truth through his examination.
Throughout this exchange, Madam Donkor reiterated that she was merely reading the information presented on the documents before her.
Account Closure and Relevance Debate
The discussion also touched upon the closure of the BNC Communications Bureau Limited account at Universal Merchant Bank (UMB). Madam Donkor stated she could not recall the exact date of closure but acknowledged that any related email communication would have originated from instructions given by Mr. Adu-Boahene and his wife.
The defense attempted to introduce an email concerning the account’s closure, but the prosecution objected on grounds of relevance. The defense argued its significance, noting the account allegedly received GH¢49.1 million, a sum integral to the prosecution’s money laundering allegations.
Counsel for the defense contended that the document could prove the account remained operational beyond 2020, potentially challenging the prosecution’s claim that it was established for illicit purposes. Justice Eugene Nyadu, presiding over the court, stated the document’s relevance would be evaluated in relation to the charges, including the money laundering allegations concerning Advantage Solutions Limited.
Future Proceedings
The trial was adjourned to May 26, 2026, to allow for the continuation of the cross-examination. Observers will be watching to see how the defense’s challenges to the financial documentation and the court’s rulings on evidence admissibility impact the unfolding case.
Leave a Reply