Former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene is “very, very comfortable” with his legal representation and is not in a hurry to cross-examine a prosecution witness himself, according to his lead counsel, Samuel Atta Akyea.

Speaking on TV3, Mr Atta Akyea said his client remained confident in his legal team following the High Court’s directive that he and his wife, Angela Adjei-Boateng, should appear with their lawyers on August 17 or risk having to cross-examine the fourth prosecution witness themselves. 

“He feels very, very comfortable with me. He believes I'm a very principle-centred lawyer. He believes I won't shortchange him and he is not in any ambulance mode to cross-examine as a lay person, a prosecution witness,” he said.

Mr Atta Akyea said the defence team would determine its next steps and navigate the controversial situation following the judge’s directive. 

“We are not little boys in the game. I'm telling you what we believe as a principle.”

He questioned the expectation that his client should personally take over the cross-examination of a prosecution witness.

“How can a judge tell a carpenter to become a dentist and remove somebody's tooth? How?” he asked.

The lawyer said the legal team would not disclose its strategy publicly.

“We will advise ourselves. We will not put our legal arsenals in public but we'll advise ourselves. We know what to do,” he emphasised.

He further insisted that the defence would not be forced to appear in court against its position on the legal vacation.

“We will not be compelled to go to court, for Christ sake!” he stressed.

“This is not the first time we've had a Chief Justice, I'm afraid.”

The High Court on Tuesday adjourned the case to August 17 after the defence lawyers failed to appear. 

Justice Francis Achibonga said the warrant authorising him to sit during the legal vacation remains valid until revoked by the Chief Justice.

The judge nevertheless gave Adu-Boahene and his wife time to resolve their legal representation, saying it would not be fair to immediately require them to cross-examine the witness without their lawyers.

He warned that if the lawyers do not appear at the next sitting, the accused persons could be required to conduct the cross-examination themselves, failing which the fourth prosecution witness could be discharged.