Adu-Boahene Trial: Defence Grills EOCO Investigator Over GH¢49.1m Probe

The trial of former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, continued at the Accra High Court on Monday, with the defence intensifying its cross-examination of the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO)’s lead investigator over the alleged diversion of GH¢49.1 million in public funds.

Frank Marshall Cromwell, the fourth prosecution witness and EOCO’s lead investigator, told the court that the investigation was initiated following a tip-off alleging the diversion of public funds rather than a formal complaint.

Under questioning by defence lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea, Mr Cromwell explained that EOCO investigations could be launched based on petitions, anonymous information, or intelligence reports.

The defence sought to establish whether a complaint had first been made to the National Security establishment before EOCO began its probe. However, Mr Cromwell said he could not confirm whether any such complaint existed, insisting the investigation was triggered by intelligence received before information was requested from the National Signals Bureau.

Mr Atta Akyea also questioned the investigator’s understanding of Ghana’s national security structure, arguing that the former Bureau of National Communications—now the National Signals Bureau—operates under the National Security Council Secretariat.

Mr Cromwell agreed that documents obtained during the investigation showed the Bureau operated under the National Security Council Secretariat while maintaining a separate bank account.

The defence further challenged the investigator over salary records tendered as evidence, noting they were obtained from the National Security Council rather than the National Signals Bureau.

Mr Cromwell confirmed that the records were indeed sourced from the National Security Council after official requests were made during the investigation.

Counsel suggested investigators had initially approached the wrong institution due to a misunderstanding of the national security structure, but the witness maintained that the requests were directed to the appropriate authority for relevant information.

The cross-examination also focused on the operation of the National Security Coordinator’s bank account, with the defence arguing that Mr Adu-Boahene could not authorise transactions independently.

Mr Cromwell acknowledged that the account required the joint signatures of both the National Security Coordinator and Mr Adu-Boahene. However, he maintained that investigations revealed GH¢49.1 million was transferred from the Bureau of National Communications account into private accounts linked to the accused persons.

He further confirmed that all three disputed cheques, amounting to GH¢

49.1 million, bore the signatures of both officials.

The investigator also told the court that Fidelity Bank informed EOCO that part of the funds had been transferred to UMB Bank for foreign exchange trading.

According to Mr Cromwell, investigators found that Mr Adu-Boahene transferred GH¢7.25 million into his personal account before returning GH¢7.2 million to the National Security Coordinator’s account, retaining GH¢50,000.

He added that investigators found no evidence the returned funds were linked to any authorised special operation, stating that the transfer back occurred only after the bank contacted the National Security Coordinator to minimise potential losses.

During the hearing, the defence tendered emails and related documents into evidence without objection from the prosecution, and the court admitted them.

Asked where the three disputed cheques were originally intended to be deposited, Mr Cromwell said he could not determine their intended destination but maintained that investigations established they eventually ended up in private accounts belonging to the accused persons.

The case has been adjourned to Wednesday, July 15, 2026, for the continuation of the cross-examination of the fourth prosecution witness.