High Court adjourns Adu-Boahene trial pending Supreme Court decision

The High Court in Accra has adjourned the trial of former National Security Secretariat director-general Kwabena Adu-Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei-Boateng, to August 25, 2026.

The adjournment follows a pending application at the Supreme Court seeking to restrain the High Court from continuing the case during the legal vacation.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear the application, filed by Ofoase/Ayirebi MP Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, on August 20.

The trial had been expected to continue before the vacation court, but the High Court judge ruled that he could not proceed while the application remained pending before the country's highest court.

The defence had initially asked the High Court to adjourn the case until the next legal term.

Counsel for the accused, Peter Osei-Asamoah, who was holding brief for lead counsel Samuel Atta Akyea, said Mr Akyea had pre-arranged professional commitments during the legal vacation and would be unable to attend the proceedings and conduct cross-examination.

He argued that an adjournment was necessary to safeguard the accused persons' constitutional right to adequate legal representation.

The prosecution opposed the request.

Deputy Attorney General Justice Srem-Sai argued that merely filing an injunction application did not prevent the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction.

He said the High Court could only be restrained if the Supreme Court actually issued an order to that effect.

The prosecution further argued that challenges to proceedings before a lower court were normally pursued through judicial review procedures, such as certiorari or prohibition, and that such applications did not automatically suspend proceedings.

The defence, however, maintained that it was not claiming that the High Court had already been restrained.

Mr Osei-Asamoah said the defence was asking the court to wait for the Supreme Court's decision because the application directly sought to prevent the High Court from continuing the trial during the legal vacation.

Judge rejects request based on lawyer's commitments

In his ruling, the judge rejected the defence's request to postpone the case until the next legal term because of Mr Akyea's professional commitments.

He said doing so would effectively move the case to October and undermine the purpose of his assignment as a vacation judge.

The judge also noted that Mr Akyea practises in a law firm with other lawyers who could potentially represent the accused in his absence.

On the Supreme Court application, however, the judge adopted a different position from the prosecution.

He noted that there were two approaches in Ghanaian jurisprudence concerning the effect of a pending injunction application.

One position holds that the mere filing of an injunction application does not stop proceedings and that only an injunction order can prevent a court or party from taking a particular action.

The other approach holds that where an application is pending before a superior court specifically seeking to restrain a lower court from taking a particular action, the lower court should wait for the superior court's decision.

The judge adopted the latter approach.

He said the application before the Supreme Court was specifically seeking to prevent the High Court from conducting proceedings during the legal vacation and was therefore different from an application seeking a stay of proceedings arising from a decision of the trial court.

The judge consequently ruled that he could not continue with the trial while the Supreme Court application remained pending.

The case has been adjourned to August 25, 2026 at 9:30am, by which time the Supreme Court is expected to have determined the injunction application.

The ruling means the future of the trial during the legal vacation will depend, at least in the immediate term, on the Supreme Court's decision on the application.