The High Court’s Specialised Division has rejected attempts by lawyers for Kwabena Adu-Boahene and his co-accused to introduce email communications and pension payment receipts as evidence in the ongoing National Signals Bureau (NSB) trial. The ruling, delivered on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, during the cross-examination of the third prosecution witness, significantly impacts the defence’s strategy.
Context of the NSB Trial
The trial centers on allegations of misappropriation involving GH¢49 million intended for the purchase of government cybersecurity software. Kwabena Adu-Boahene, his wife Angela Boateng, and their company Advantage Solutions Limited are accused of diverting these funds.
Prosecutors allege that the substantial sum was channeled through a network of companies before reaching Advantage Solutions Limited. This company, in turn, allegedly used the funds to acquire various properties located in Accra, Kumasi, and London.
Defence’s Attempted Evidence Inclusion
Defence lawyers for the accused made a concerted effort to submit email correspondence between the prosecution’s third witness and third-party pension managers. These emails were reportedly linked to Advantage Solutions Limited, the third accused company.
The defence argued that these emails were crucial to demonstrating that Advantage Solutions Limited operated as a legitimate and ongoing business entity. This argument aimed to counter the prosecution’s narrative, which portrayed the first and second accused as orchestrators of a criminal enterprise through the company.
Prosecution’s Opposition and Court’s Ruling
The Deputy Attorney-General, Justice Srem-Sai, strongly opposed the admission of the emails. He contended that the communications were irrelevant to the core issues of the criminal trial.
A key point of contention was the timing of the emails, which the prosecution stated occurred in August 2024, four years after the alleged transactions at the heart of the case. The prosecution argued that there was no clear link between these later-dated emails and the charges the accused faced.
Furthermore, the prosecution invoked Section 52 of the Evidence Act. This section allows courts to reject evidence if its probative value is outweighed by other legal considerations, such as relevance and potential prejudice.
The court sided with the prosecution, ruling that the proposed email evidence was not relevant to determining the guilt or innocence of the accused concerning the charges before the court.
Second Failed Attempt: Pension Receipts
Undeterred, the defence team made a second attempt to introduce evidence, this time focusing on receipts for pension contributions allegedly paid to pension managers. This move also aimed to bolster the argument of Advantage Solutions Limited’s legitimacy.
However, the Deputy Attorney-General raised similar objections regarding relevance. The court ultimately rejected these receipts as well, adhering to its stance on the admissibility of evidence.
Implications and Next Steps
The court’s decision to exclude these documents means the defence must pursue alternative strategies to establish the legitimacy of Advantage Solutions Limited and counter the prosecution’s narrative of a sophisticated financial scheme.
The trial is scheduled to continue on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, with the ongoing cross-examination of the third prosecution witness. Observers will be watching closely to see how the defence adapts its approach in light of these evidentiary rulings and what new lines of questioning emerge.
Leave a Reply