Adu-Boahene Trial: Atta Akyea Unhappy as High Court Rejects Bid to Halt Proceedings
Defence counsel says the High Court should have awaited the Supreme Court’s decision on the fresh application.
- Court rejects adjournment request
- Atta Akyea expresses concern
- Fresh Supreme Court application pending
Lead counsel for former Signals Bureau Director-General Kwadwo Adu Boahene, Samuel Atta Akyea, has expressed disappointment over the Accra High Court’s decision to continue his client’s trial despite a fresh application before the Supreme Court seeking to restrain the proceedings.
The development follows the High Court’s dismissal of a defence application seeking an adjournment of the trial pending the Supreme Court’s determination of a review application filed by Ofoase-Ayirebi MP Kojo Oppong Nkrumah.
The review application concerns the continuation of selected criminal cases during the legal vacation.
Mr Atta Akyea had urged the court to adjourn proceedings until September 2, when a three-member panel of the Supreme Court is expected to hear the review application.
He argued that the outcome of the application could have implications for the ongoing trial and that it would therefore be prudent for the High Court to await the Supreme Court’s decision.
However, Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Justice Srem-Sai opposed the request, arguing that the prosecution had only one more day to close its case.
He maintained that the Supreme Court had already determined the substantive interlocutory application concerning the legal vacation and that the mere filing of a review application did not automatically suspend the proceedings.
Justice Francis Apanga Achibonga, after hearing arguments from both sides, ruled that he had not identified any rule requiring the trial to be suspended under the circumstances.
The judge further noted that although the earlier Supreme Court decision had been delivered by a single judge, it remained binding unless set aside or reversed by a subsequent decision.
The court subsequently dismissed the defence’s request for an adjournment and proceeded with the trial.
Reacting to the decision after the hearing, Mr Atta Akyea said he was surprised that the court had continued with the case despite being informed of the fresh application before the three-member Supreme Court panel.
He also expressed concern about his client being expected to cross-examine a witness, arguing that Adu Boahene was not trained to conduct cross-examination.
Mr Atta Akyea maintained that although an earlier injunction application had been dismissed, the fresh application before the three-member Supreme Court panel should have been taken into consideration before the High Court proceeded with the trial.
He said the defence returned to court based on both the Supreme Court’s earlier decision and the renewed application filed by Mr Oppong Nkrumah, insisting that it would have been more appropriate for the High Court to await the Supreme Court’s determination.
