Accra, September 9, 2026, The Republic has closed its case against former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene, his wife Angela Adjei-Boateng, and their company, Advantage Solutions Limited, in the trial involving the alleged diversion of GH¢49.1 million in public funds.
The prosecution brought its case to a close on Tuesday, September 8, after calling four witnesses and completing the cross-examination of its final witness, Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) investigator Frank Marshall Cromwell.
The accused persons are facing 11 financial offences, including stealing, money laundering, willfully causing financial loss to the Republic, conspiracy, collaboration to commit crime and abuse of public office. They have pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The case centres on GH¢49.1 million which the prosecution alleges was public money earmarked for the procurement of a cybersecurity defence system for the state.
According to the prosecution, the money was transferred from an account associated with the National Security Coordinator’s special operations into an account belonging to BNC Communications Bureau Limited, a private company allegedly connected to Adu-Boahene and his wife. The prosecution says the transfer was made through three cheques in 2020.
Four witnesses called
The State relied on the testimony of four witnesses during its case.
The first prosecution witness, Frank Anane Dekpey, a driver associated with Adu-Boahene, testified about errands he allegedly carried out for the former NSB boss, including the movement of large amounts of cash.
According to the prosecution’s account, Dekpey told the court that he transported cash in “Ghana Must Go” bags for deposits and withdrawals allegedly made on Adu-Boahene’s instructions.
The second witness, Ruby Edith Adumoah Opoku, Head of Finance at the NSB, gave evidence concerning the movement of the GH¢49.1 million from an account belonging to the state agency.
The prosecution said she testified that the funds ended up in an account unknown to the NSB and that the names appearing on the three cheques did not correspond with the account into which the money was eventually deposited. She also testified about the agency’s procedures for procuring cybersecurity systems.
The third prosecution witness, Mildred Donkor, testified about the operation of a company allegedly established by the accused persons and the movement of funds through the company.
The prosecution said Donkor told the court that Adu-Boahene and his wife provided her with pre-signed cheques which were used in transactions involving the company. She also gave evidence concerning how funds were allegedly spent through companies, family members and associates.
The fourth and final witness was EOCO investigator Frank Marshall Cromwell, who presented evidence from the investigation into the alleged diversion of the funds.
Cromwell testified about the three cheques and deposit slips allegedly used to transfer the GH¢49.1 million into the private company’s account. He also presented documents relating to companies allegedly connected to the accused persons, bank statements, and documents concerning the purchase of landed properties.
Disputed cybersecurity system
A major issue in the prosecution’s case has been the alleged cybersecurity system for which the GH¢49.1 million was purportedly intended.
The prosecution maintains that the money was not used for the intended procurement.
During his evidence, Cromwell told the Accra High Court that a letter allegedly presented as proof that the cybersecurity system had been purchased was not genuine.
The EOCO investigator said forensic examination showed irregularities in the document, including discrepancies in the company name, differences in logo sizes, the absence of contact details and the lack of a named signatory. He therefore rejected the document as authentic.
The defence challenged aspects of the investigation, including the investigator’s handling of information concerning the purported supplier of the cybersecurity system.
Cromwell nevertheless maintained that the investigation was based on evidence and documents gathered from relevant institutions. In earlier testimony, he said EOCO’s investigations established that the GH¢49.1 million had been transferred from a state account and that part of the money was allegedly used for the personal benefit of Adu-Boahene and his wife.
Defence prepares no-case submission
With the prosecution having closed its case, the next major stage of the trial will be the defence’s submission of no case to answer.
The Accra High Court has directed lawyers for the accused persons to file their written submission by September 25, 2026.
The prosecution will then have 14 days to respond after being served with the defence’s submission, after which the defence will have seven days to file a reply.
The court has adjourned the case to November 5, 2026, when it is expected to rule on whether the prosecution has established a sufficient case requiring the accused persons to open their defence.
If the court upholds the no-case submission, the accused persons could be discharged at that stage. If the court rules that the prosecution has established a case to answer, the accused persons will be required to present their defence.
The defence has already raised concerns about the time allowed for preparing the no-case submission. Lead counsel Samuel Atta Akyea argued that the period granted was insufficient to properly review the evidence and prepare what he described as a credible submission.
Background to the case
The trial has centred on the alleged movement of GH¢49.1 million from a government-related account into a private company account.
Earlier in the proceedings, the defence questioned aspects of the prosecution’s evidence, including whether there had been a formal complaint concerning the alleged missing funds and whether investigators had fully established the purpose and authorisation surrounding the transactions.
In July, Cromwell acknowledged during cross-examination that there was no identifiable complainant whose complaint had directly triggered the investigation. He also said he had not consulted officials of the National Security Secretariat or another relevant national security institution to establish the operational context of the transactions under investigation.
The defence has consistently challenged the prosecution’s allegations, while the accused persons have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The closure of the State’s case does not amount to a finding of guilt against any of the accused persons. The court must first determine whether the evidence presented by the prosecution establishes a case requiring them to respond.
The November 5 ruling will therefore mark a significant stage in the trial and determine whether the former NSB boss, his wife and Advantage Solutions Limited will be required to open their defence against the allegations surrounding the GH¢49.1 million.
SEIDU HUBEIDATU