The state is set to close its case next week in the high-profile trial of The Republic v Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two others, where the principal accused faces charges for allegedly stealing GHS 49.1 million from a government bank account.
Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem Sai revealed the update, expressing confidence in the volume of evidence compiled by state prosecutors and investigators from the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
“We look forward to closing our case in The Republic v Kwabena Adu-Boahene & 2 Others next week,” the Deputy Attorney-General stated. “We believe that justice will be served to both the accused persons and our beloved Republic at the end of the day.”
According to the prosecution, the GHS 49.1 million in question has been traceably established as Government of Ghana funds held in a government agency account, a point the state notes remains undisputed in court.
The state’s evidence outlines a systematic operation where the principal accused allegedly opened a private company bank account on the exact day the first cheque was issued, deliberately mimicking the name of the state agency. Prosecutors argue that three cheques intended for the government agency were subsequently diverted into this private account.
Financial records presented to the court detail how the entire sum was exhausted within a six-month window. The prosecution has submitted purchase receipts, bank statements, and ownership documents tracking expenditure on luxury vehicles and prime real estate for the accused, his family, and associates.
The state also countered claims made by the principal accused regarding the destination of the funds.
While the accused previously asserted that the GHS 49.1 million was used to finance political campaigns during the 2024 elections, the Deputy Attorney-General stated that the evidence proves this claim was a deliberate attempt to mislead the public.
Furthermore, the prosecution introduced evidence of forged receipts intended to cover up equipment purchases that never took place, noting the private account was eventually closed only after bankers flagged the transactions as suspicious.
Although the accused persons initially denied ownership of the flagged companies, bank accounts, and luxury assets, the prosecution maintained that they later admitted ownership when confronted with investigators’ findings.
The trial continues as the state prepares its final witnesses for the upcoming court session.
Below is the full statement
We look forward to closing our case in The Republic v Kwabena Adu-Boahene & 2 Others next week. In the case, the principal accused person is being tried for stealing Ghc 49.1 million from a government bank account.
Our hard working state attorneys and EOCO investigators have already placed the following body of evidence before the trial court:
▪️Evidence that the Ghc 49.1 million is emphatically a Government of Ghana money in a government agency bank account. No dispute in court over its source.
▪️Evidence that the principal accused person created a fresh bank account (on the day of the first cheque) in the name of his private company to mimic the name of a government agency.
▪️Evidence that the principal accused person carefully diverted 3 cheques which were meant for a government agency into the private bank account.
▪️Detailed evidence of how, within 6 months, the principal accused person spent each pesewa of the money, buying houses in prime locations and luxury cars for himself, family and friends.
▪️Purchase receipts, bank statements, ownership documents, containing dates, amount, names, etc., evidencing the bank transfers, purchases and payments, etc.
▪️Evidence that the accused persons initially denied knowledge and ownership of some of their own companies, bank accounts and the luxury properties, but later, upon confrontation, admitted them.
▪️Evidence that the principal accused person deliberately misled the public when he said that he used the Ghc 49.1 million for fund political campaigns in 2024.
▪️Evidence that the principal accused person was forced to close that bank account when his own bankers flagged the bank account as “suspicious”.
▪️Evidence that the equipment which the principal accused person claimed he was going to use or used the money to buy was never bought.
▪️ Evidence of forged purchase receipts for the said equipment – in an attempt to conceal the fact that the equipment was never bought.
We believe that justice will be served to both the accused persons and our beloved Republic at the end of the day.
