Presiding Judge, Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga, in the trial of former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau (NSB), Kwabena Adu-Boahene, and his wife, Mrs Angela Adjei-Boateng, has directed the accused persons to ensure that their lawyers are present at the next sitting or face the prospect of conducting the cross-examination of the last prosecution witness themselves.
Justice Apangabuno Achibonga gave the order after the accused persons’ lead counsel, Mr Samuel Atta Akyea, and his team were unable to appear at the Special Court 1 on Monday 11 August 2026.
Absent
When the case was called, the judge asked Mr Adu-Boahene where his lawyer was.
In his response, Mr Adu-Boahene told the court that it had been difficult reaching his lawyer, adding that as of the weekend, he had been aware that Mr Atta Akyea and his team were engaged in marking scripts outside Accra.
He said he was uncertain whether lead counsel was even within the jurisdiction, and asked the court to indulge them while they tried to resolve the matter.
AG’s position
The Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, who represented the state, told the court that he was aware defence counsel had written to the Chief Justice, the Registrar of the court and the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), indicating he would exercise what he described as an “alleged right” not to attend court during the legal vacation.
Dr Srem-Sai argued that the power to determine whether court proceedings should be held during the legal vacation rested with the Chief Justice, subject to the inherent power of a trial judge to control proceedings in his own court.
He said there was no law, rule, practice or convention that allowed a lawyer or group of lawyers to unilaterally decide whether proceedings should take place.
Where counsel had genuine grounds to be absent, he said, the proper course was to apply to the court for an adjournment, which the court could grant in whole, in part, or refuse.
The Deputy Attorney-General urged the court to allow proceedings to continue without hindrance.
Orders
In his ruling, Justice Achibonga stated that counsel for the accused persons had given no explanation for his absence, even though he had been present when the case was adjourned to today specifically to continue his cross-examination.
The judge said he had taken notice of a letter dated August 5, 2026 from defence counsel to the Chief Justice, asking for reconsideration of the directive to sit during the legal vacation, as well as a separate letter from the GBA raising concerns about vacation sittings.
He said, however, that these letters did not amount to a stay of proceedings.
He said he had been issued a warrant by the Chief Justice to sit and conduct hearings during the legal vacation, and that until that warrant was revoked, he remained mandated to continue sitting.
Justice Achibonga said it would not be fair to compel the accused persons to cross-examine the fourth prosecution witness (PW4) even though their lawyers had abandoned them without justification.
He added that it was proper to give the accused persons the opportunity to advise themselves on the future conduct of their legal representation.
The court accordingly adjourned the case to 17 August 2026.
