The Convener of the Coalition of Civil Society Organisations, Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, has called for the protection of judicial independence in the ongoing criminal proceedings involving former National Signals Bureau Director-General, Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two other accused persons, insisting that the trial judge, Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga, must be allowed to perform his judicial responsibilities without political pressure, intimidation, public coercion or improper influence from any quarter.on October 27, 2026, on behalf of the coalition, which comprises SMART Generation Governance Hub (SMARTGENZ), OmanGh Interest Advocates, Alliance of Pastors for Social and Moral Development, and Agenda for Security and Social Systems.
The coalition said its intervention was motivated by concerns about judicial independence, the presumption of innocence, prosecutorial responsibility and public confidence in Ghana’s criminal justice system as the case proceeds before the Accra High Court, Specialised Jurisdiction Division.
According to Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, the coalition’s position is not intended to undermine the prosecution or defence, pronounce the accused persons guilty or innocent, or influence the court towards a predetermined outcome.
“Our interest is justice, not a predetermined outcome,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated, stressing that the determination of criminal liability rests exclusively with the courts exercising their constitutional jurisdiction.
He said the prosecution must prove its case with credible evidence, the defence must enjoy every protection guaranteed under the law, and the trial judge must determine the matter strictly on the evidence and the applicable legal principles.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah maintained that the seriousness of the allegations in the case, including claims concerning financial impropriety involving a national security institution, must not become a substitute for the evidence required to establish criminal responsibility.
He further stated that nobody should be above the law and nobody should be denied the protection of the law.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah expressed concern about the circumstances surrounding the public presentation of allegations against Adu-Boahene and his wife at a press conference by the Attorney-General in March 2025.
According to Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, while the allegations were serious and understandably attracted public attention, their magnitude did not relieve the prosecution of its responsibility to prove them in court.
He argued that public statements by officials before the conclusion of criminal proceedings must be handled with restraint to avoid creating the impression that an accused person’s guilt has already been determined.
“A criminal prosecution must not become a public conviction before it becomes a judicial determination,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated.
He urged public officials to exercise caution in their commentary on pending cases, emphasising that the constitutional presumption of innocence must be respected regardless of the nature of the allegations or the public interest they generate.
The coalition drew attention to the ongoing legal proceedings following the conclusion of the prosecution’s case and the accused persons’ submission of no case to answer.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah said the accused persons had challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution, while the prosecution had filed its response for consideration by the court.
He stressed that the coalition was not seeking to determine whether the prosecution had established a sufficient case but wanted the court to examine the evidence impartially and apply the appropriate legal standards.
Among the issues identified by Rev. DK Odei-Appiah were reports concerning whether an official of the National Security establishment had testified to lodging a complaint about the alleged loss of funds.
He said that, if the court record confirmed the reported absence of such testimony, the circumstances in which the alleged loss was identified and the evidential basis for the claim would require careful judicial consideration.
He further cited reported testimony concerning the department’s budget of GH¢13.8 million in 2020 and the absence of an audit report indicating the alleged loss.
According to Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, these matters raise questions about the institution’s financial administration, the monitoring of its accounts and the evidential basis for attributing the alleged loss to the accused persons.
He emphasised, however, that these observations should not be interpreted as judicial findings that the prosecution’s case had failed.
“The prosecution must be judged by the evidence it has presented, not by the seriousness of the allegations it announced at the beginning of the case,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated.
He added that the court must carefully assess whether the evidence establishes the alleged unlawful diversion of public funds, connects each accused person to the alleged transactions and demonstrates the criminal character of the conduct charged.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah further argued that the existence of an account, the movement of funds through it, the legal character of the funds and proof of unlawful appropriation are separate matters that must be established through evidence.
He also pointed to the reported absence of a demonstrated link between any of the houses allegedly acquired and the GH¢49.1 million said to have gone missing, urging the court to assess the relevant evidence on its merits.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah expressed particular concern about a defence application reportedly challenging portions of the prosecution’s written submissions opposing the no-case submission.
He said the defence had reportedly asked the prosecution to identify where the disputed statements appeared in the proceedings and was seeking orders to have the challenged portions expunged from the submissions.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah noted that the State Attorney representing the Attorney-General’s Department had informed the court that the prosecution did not intend to file an affidavit in opposition and would instead argue on points of law.
He added that the court had adjourned the application to Thursday, October 29, 2026.
The convener cautioned that the defence’s allegations remained unproven and that the application must be determined by the court on its merits.
He nevertheless maintained that the accurate presentation of witness testimony was fundamental to the integrity of criminal proceedings.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah said written submissions should analyse and interpret the evidence on record without misrepresenting what witnesses had said or attributing statements to them without a proper basis.
He added that if the court established that testimony had been improperly attributed to witnesses, the matter would raise serious questions about professional responsibility, prosecutorial ethics and the integrity of the judicial process.
He stressed that any appropriate response must follow the law and the applicable disciplinary procedures.
The coalition also warned against drawing conclusions about the entire National Security establishment from allegations against individual officials.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah acknowledged that accountability within national security institutions was essential and that such institutions must not be used as shields for corruption, financial misconduct or abuse of office.
However, he argued that allegations against an individual should not automatically translate into a presumption of institutional wrongdoing.
According to Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, attributing criminal responsibility to an individual requires evidence establishing that person’s alleged conduct and connection to the offence, rather than reliance solely on institutional association.
He warned that unjustified conclusions could undermine public confidence in national security institutions, affect the morale of personnel who perform their duties lawfully and weaken the credibility of legitimate security operations.
He maintained that the integrity of national security depended on both accountability for wrongdoing and protection against unsupported allegations.
“Ghana’s security institutions must be subject to the law, but they must not be condemned by association,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated.
Central to the coalition’s statement was a call for the protection of Justice Francis Apangabuno Achibonga from any form of improper influence as he considers the issues before the court.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah invoked Articles 125 and 127 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, which establish the constitutional position of judicial power and safeguard the independence of the Judiciary.
He said these constitutional protections were essential to ensuring that judicial decisions were based on the law and evidence rather than political interests or public pressure.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah urged political actors, public officeholders and all interested parties to refrain from conduct that could compromise the actual or perceived independence of the trial judge.
He also called on the public to distinguish between legitimate scrutiny of the justice system and attempts to dictate the outcome of a pending criminal case.
According to Rev. DK Odei-Appiah, judicial independence does not place judges beyond public accountability but ensures that their decisions are guided by the Constitution, the law and the evidence properly presented before them.
He stressed that the trial judge owed no allegiance to either the prosecution or the defence and that his responsibility was to uphold the Constitution and the law.
“The public interest is not served by a conviction secured at any cost, nor by an acquittal unsupported by the law. It is served when the judicial process is fair, impartial and credible,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated.
The Coalition of Civil Society Organisations outlined a series of demands aimed at safeguarding the integrity of the proceedings and reinforcing public confidence in the administration of justice.
First, Rev. DK Odei-Appiah called on Justice Apangabuno Achibonga to discharge his constitutional mandate with courage, independence and fidelity to the law.
He urged the judge to determine every application and issue strictly on the evidence and applicable law, resisting improper influence from political, institutional or public sources.
Second, he called on the President, members of the Executive, political party officials and all public officeholders to respect judicial independence and refrain from actions or statements that could influence, or appear to influence, the outcome of the trial.
Third, Rev. DK Odei-Appiah demanded that the case be determined without regard to the political affiliation, party membership or public popularity of the accused persons.
He argued that every accused person was entitled to equal protection of the law and a fair hearing before an independent and impartial court.
Fourth, he urged the court to consider the evidence presented by the prosecution and the submissions of both parties before applying the appropriate legal standards to the no-case submission and other matters before it.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah said the court must act in accordance with the law if the evidence satisfied the applicable threshold and must equally give effect to the law if that threshold was not met.
Fifth, he called for the transparent and judicial resolution of the dispute over the alleged attribution of statements to prosecution witnesses.
He urged the court to determine the defence application by reference to the record of proceedings and the applicable law, ensuring that both parties had a fair opportunity to present their arguments.
Sixth, Rev. DK Odei-Appiah called on the Attorney-General’s Department to uphold the highest standards of prosecutorial responsibility by ensuring that its submissions accurately reflected the evidence on record.
He maintained that the prosecution’s responsibility extended beyond securing convictions to assisting in the proper administration of justice.
Finally, he urged public officials, political parties, media organisations and commentators to avoid presenting allegations as established guilt or making pronouncements that could prejudice the fair determination of the case.
He said public discussion of judicial proceedings was legitimate, but it must not become an attempt to replace judicial determination with public opinion.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah said the Republic v. Kwabena Adu-Boahene & Others proceedings represented an important test of public confidence in the fairness, impartiality and independence of Ghana’s criminal justice system.
He reiterated that the coalition was not asking the court to acquit or convict the accused persons but was calling for the constitutional principles of judicial independence, due process and equal protection of the law to be respected.
“Our message to the Government is clear: respect the judicial process. Our message to the prosecution is clear: let the evidence speak. Our message to the Judiciary is clear: determine the matter independently, in accordance with the law,” Rev. DK Odei-Appiah stated.
He added that the rule of law was protected not when courts delivered verdicts that satisfied particular interests but when judges were free to deliver the decisions required by the law.
Rev. DK Odei-Appiah maintained that Ghana deserved a justice system in which every accused person received a fair hearing, every prosecutor was accountable for the accuracy of the case presented, every judge was protected from improper influence, and every judgment was grounded in the law.
He said the coalition would continue to defend these principles in the interest of constitutional democracy, accountability, transparency and good governance.
