Supreme Court Dismisses Attorney-General’s Review Request in Adu Boahen Prosecution

The Supreme Court has rejected a review application filed by the Attorney-General in the ongoing criminal case involving former National Signals Bureau Director-General, Kwabena Adu Boahen, and his wife.

The Attorney-General, represented by Deputy A-G Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, had asked the Court to reinstate the word “relevance” in the Practice Direction on Further Disclosures — the rule that guides the prosecution’s duty to disclose documents during criminal trials.

In an earlier ruling, the Supreme Court held that prosecutors are obligated to disclose only materials in their possession that are connected to the case, not every document that is merely “relevant.” That decision stemmed from a judicial review filed by Mr. Adu Boahen and his wife, who challenged the High Court’s refusal to order additional disclosures.

While acknowledging the Court’s earlier judgment, Dr. Srem-Sai argued that removing the term “relevance” may lead to overly broad disclosure demands based solely on the prosecutor's possession of documents, even if the material lacks a meaningful link to the case. He urged the Court to either restore the original wording or replace it with “connected with the matter before the Court.”

However, counsel for the accused, Samuel Atta Akyea, countered that the Deputy Attorney-General had not shown any exceptional grounds to justify a review. He maintained that the original ruling already provided clarity by limiting disclosures to documents directly linked to the issues in the trial.

After hearing submissions, the Supreme Court reserved its judgment. On Wednesday, the Court, by majority decision, dismissed the Attorney-General’s application. Justice Kulendi dissented.

The Court is expected to release its full written reasoning on or before February 4, 2026.