Accra: An Accra High Court has maintained that the trial of former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene will continue during the legal vacation. Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga, a Justice of the Court of Appeal sitting as an additional High Court Judge, stated that the warrant authorising him to sit during the vacation remained valid until revoked by the Chief Justice. This decision came after the absence of some defence lawyers, including Mr Samuel Atta-Akyea, during the proceedings.
According to Ghana News Agency, Mr Adu-Boahene informed the Court that he had difficulty reaching his lawyer, who was reportedly engaged in activities outside Accra over the weekend. He appealed to the Court for time to resolve his legal representation issues. Dr Justice Srem-Sai, Deputy Attorney-General, acknowledged that some defence lawyers had communicated their intentions to abstain from proceedings during the legal vacation to the Chief Justice, Court Registrar, and Ghana Bar Association.
Dr Srem-Sai emphasized that the Chief Justice held the authority to decide whether courts should continue during the legal vacation, and this directive was binding on the Judge. He cited Order 75 Rule 4 and Order 71 Rule 11 of the High Court Rules to support this claim, arguing that no law or convention allowed lawyers to independently decide the continuation of proceedings. He also noted that absent lawyers could apply for adjournments, subject to the Court's discretion.
Justice Achibonga pointed out that Mr Atta-Akyea was present when the case was adjourned to August 11 to 13, 2026, yet absent without permission. However, he acknowledged Mr Atta-Akyea's petition to the Chief Justice and the Ghana Bar Association's concerns. Justice Achibonga stated that these petitions did not constitute a stay of proceedings, affirming that his warrant to sit remained valid until revoked.
The Judge considered the fairness of proceeding without the accused's lawyers and noted the accused's presence in court. He advised that they should arrange for legal representation, warning that they might have to conduct cross-examinations themselves if unrepresented in future sittings. The Court adjourned the case to August 17, 2026, for further proceedings.