The Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, has dismissed claims that the criminal case against former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene is complex, insisting that the prosecution’s case centres on the alleged diversion of public funds meant for national security procurement into a private account.
Speaking on Joy News on Sunday, July 26, 2026, Dr Srem-Sai alleged that there was a deliberate public and media campaign to create the impression that the case was more complicated than it actually is.
“I think there’s a very determined public campaign, media campaign, to create an impression. It’s a simple case, Samson,” he said.
Mr Adu-Boahene, his wife Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor and Advantage Solutions Limited are standing trial on 11 charges, including stealing, money laundering, defrauding by false pretences and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
The charges, filed by the Attorney-General in April 2025, allege that about GHS49 million earmarked for the acquisition of cyber defence software was unlawfully diverted from the NSB for private use. The accused persons have denied the charges.
Dr Srem-Sai said the prosecution would seek to prove that public funds were transferred from a government account into a private account under the pretext of purchasing defence equipment for the state.
“There is public money in a public account. You have moved the public money from the public account into a private account and told the bank which did the transaction that you are using the money to go and purchase defence equipment for the state,” he said.
According to the Deputy Attorney-General, evidence gathered by the prosecution indicates that the funds were subsequently used to acquire personal assets rather than the intended security equipment.
“The evidence shows from the account into which you deposited the money that you spent the money to buy houses for yourself and other high-end cars which you were renting and using for your own good,” he said.
“Our case is simple. You cannot do this with public money. It amounts to stealing or causing financial loss or any of the public financial offences. That is what we are charging for.”
He further disclosed that one of the defence’s initial explanations for the transfer of funds was that the money represented repayment of loans allegedly advanced by Mr Adu-Boahene to a public institution.
“They first started by saying that it was a loan. I’m sure you heard about that, that he gives loans to the public institution, and so the money moving back into his account is a repayment of the loan,” Dr Srem-Sai said.
The trial continues at the High Court, where the prosecution is seeking to prove that public funds intended for national security procurement were unlawfully diverted for private benefit. The accused persons remain presumed innocent unless proven guilty by the court.
Credit: Citi Newsroom