Kwesi Botchway Jnr is a lawyer
Private legal practitioner, Kwesi Botchway Jnr, has dismissed claims by Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai that former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, used the alleged GH¢49.1 million state funds to acquire cars and houses, describing the assertion as “baseless” and “in the theatre of the absurd.”
According to Botchway Jnr, the claims made by the Deputy Attorney-General in a social media post do not accurately reflect the evidence presented before the court in the ongoing trial involving Adu-Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, and Advantage Solutions Ltd.
In a statement posted via Facebook, the lawyer said the public commentary by the Deputy AG was only a repetition of allegations made by the prosecution during a press conference, which, according to him, have not been established through evidence in court.
“Notice has been taken of a social media post by the Deputy AG which seeks to misinform the public about a number of developments in the trial. Those claims are inaccurate and do not fairly represent the evidence that has been placed before the court,” Botchway Jnr stated.
He added that the public should disregard such assertions and allow the judicial process to determine the matter based on evidence properly admitted before the court.
Botchway Jnr argued that the Deputy Attorney-General’s statement was “merely a summary of the prosecution’s allegations in the infamous press conference which they abandoned in court,” insisting that it was not a determination of the evidence before the trial judge.
Touching on the source of the alleged GH¢49.1 million, the lawyer said the Court of Appeal had ordered the Attorney-General to provide evidence regarding the source of the funds, but the response filed by the Attorney-General on July 1, 2026, stated that no such evidence was available.
“The Attorney General categorically stated that he has no evidence regarding the source of the funds. It is therefore misleading for the Deputy Attorney General to suggest that there is no dispute over the ownership or character of the money,” he said.
Botchway Jnr maintained that, based on the prosecution’s own showing, the only established fact was that it had no evidence proving the source of the alleged funds.
On the movement of the funds, the lawyer said evidence from prosecution witnesses, including the lead investigator from the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), contradicted claims that Adu-Boahene personally transferred the money into his private account.
He stated that the EOCO investigator testified that the cheques involved were signed by the then National Security Coordinator, who authorised the opening of the Fidelity Bank account.
“The lead investigator admitted under oath that he does not know the purpose for which the National Security Coordinator issued those cheques,” Mr Botchway Jnr said.
He further argued that evidence before the court showed that the account was a National Security Special Operations Account and that two of the three cheques were deposited into the account by the prosecution’s own second witness, who served as Head of Finance at the National Signals Bureau.
According to him, the witness, Madam Edith, confirmed in court that she personally transacted on the account several times and paid the two cheques herself.
On the allegation of diversion of funds, Botchway Jnr argued that the prosecution had failed to identify the account or destination to which the funds were originally intended to be transferred.
“If the prosecution maintains that the GH¢49.1 million was ‘diverted,’ then it must identify the account or destination for which those funds were originally intended. Yet, the lead investigator admitted under oath that he is unaware of any other account number to which the funds were supposed to have been transferred,” he stated.
He described the diversion allegation as “a figment” unless the prosecution could establish the intended destination of the funds.
Addressing allegations that Adu-Boahene used the funds to acquire houses, vehicles, and other assets, Botchway Jnr said the prosecution had so far failed to produce evidence before the court linking the accused persons to such acquisitions.
“Despite the public allegations, the prosecution has, to date, failed to produce a single piece of evidence before the court that the accused persons used the alleged proceeds to purchase houses, vehicles, or other assets for themselves or their associates,” he stated.
Botchway Jnr urged members of the public to carefully examine the documents relating to the Court of Appeal’s order and the Attorney-General’s response, arguing that the documents demonstrate weaknesses in the prosecution’s case.
“The Attorney General filed that response voluntarily. No one put a gun to his head to state that he had no evidence regarding the source of the alleged GH¢49.1 million, and the purpose for which the National Security Coordinator disbursed those special operations funds,” he added.
He stressed that the outcome of the case would ultimately be determined by the court based on evidence presented during trial and not by public commentary, opinions, or social media discussions.
“Justice will be determined by the court on the basis of the evidence properly admitted before it, not by the assertions, opinions, or commentary of any individual on social media,” Botchway Jnr said.
Copyright © 1994 - 2026 GhanaWeb. All rights reserved.
