Legal Showdown: Atta Akyea Slams 'Selective Justice' in Adu-Boahene Trial Amidst Vacation Storm
Lead counsel Samuel Atta Akyea has vehemently rejected claims of trial delays in the Kwabena Adu-Boahene case, asserting his principled opposition to continuing substantive trials during legal vacation. He describes the practice as an "aberration" of legal traditions and a form of "selective justice," while the High Court pushes for the trial's continuation, even in the absence of the defence team.
Lead counsel for former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene, Samuel Atta Akyea, has strongly refuted allegations that the defence is intentionally using the judiciary’s legal vacation period to delay an ongoing trial. Speaking on JoyNews’ Top Story, Mr. Atta Akyea asserted that he has consistently attended court and has no intention of frustrating the proceedings. These comments directly challenge remarks made by Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, who accused the defence of employing various tactics, including leveraging the legal vacation, to slow down the trial.
Mr. Atta Akyea emphatically denied the accusations, stating, "I haven't done anything like that. I've faithfully attended court from the beginning to now." He emphasized that his approach is rooted in paying "obeisance to the rule of law" and ensuring justice, which he would not compromise for "anybody's ambulance thinking of expedited trials." He reiterated the defence's consistent presence in court for cross-examinations, stressing that the justice system must uphold the rule of law and avoid creating a "two-track system" where some cases are expedited while others follow a normal track.
The core of Mr. Atta Akyea's principled stand centers on the traditional purpose of the legal vacation. He criticized the decision to continue his client’s trial during this period as a significant departure from established judicial practice and an "aberration" of the traditions of the legal profession. While acknowledging the judge's authority to order the continuation of proceedings, he declared he would not lend his support to such practices. He highlighted that the legal vacation is intended for judges and lawyers to rest, with only urgent matters typically handled. He questioned the basis for treating the Adu-Boahene case as an emergency, stating, "What is the emergency about the Adu-Boahene case that if today we don't want to rest, we want to continue, so that what happens? ...Spare us this selective justice. I will not be part of it."
The case involves Mr. Adu-Boahene, his wife Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor, and Advantage Solutions Limited, who are facing 11 charges. These charges include conspiracy, stealing, using public office for profit, money laundering, and causing financial loss to the state. Specifically, the allegations include stealing GH¢49.1 million intended for a cybersecurity defence system. All accused persons have pleaded not guilty and are currently on bail.
The High Court in Accra has issued directives for the trial's continuation. Following proceedings on August 11, when Mr. Adu-Boahene and his wife appeared without their legal team, Justice Francis Apangabonu Achibonga, a Court of Appeal judge sitting as an additional High Court judge, gave them six days to secure lawyers for the continuation of their trial on August 17. The court warned that if they fail to appear with counsel on the next adjourned date, they would be required to personally continue the cross-examination of the fourth prosecution witness. Furthermore, if the accused persons decline to conduct the cross-examination themselves, the witness would be discharged.
This is not the first clash between the defence and prosecution over the trial's pace. In July 2025, the High Court dismissed a defence application seeking further disclosure of National Security operational account records dating back to 1992, which the defence argued could support their case. Following this ruling, Mr. Atta Akyea sought time to study the court's decision, prompting Dr. Srem-Sai to oppose any delay. At that time, Mr. Atta Akyea accused the prosecution of withholding documents and famously declared, “I won’t accept any ambulance trial.”
Mr. Atta Akyea's resolve on this matter runs deep. He emphasized that his decision not to appear in court on August 11 was deliberate and grounded in the traditional purpose of the legal vacation. He stated that the vacation is not intended for "hard-heard criminal cases" but for lawyers to rest, with vacation judges handling only emergency motions. He questioned the justification for making selected cases proceed during vacation, describing it as an "unusual departure from established court practice." He stated that he and his legal team would not endorse what he considers a significant departure from conventional legal practice.
Defending his absence and principled stance, Mr. Atta Akyea rejected suggestions that he was abandoning his client. He declared, "I’m not giving up on my client, but I’m upholding principle." He drew a parallel to J.B. Danquah, a member of Ghana’s Big Six who died in prison defending democratic principles, stating, "I would prefer to die for democracy than to say that I want my comfort." He stressed that lawyers have a responsibility to defend principles that underpin the rule of law, not practice "convenience in terms of trying to hallow democracy." He clarified that the issue was not about his personal status as counsel but about upholding principles, warning that compromising established legal traditions for individual cases could set a dangerous precedent and weaken the legal profession and Ghana’s democratic institutions.