'I am not a thief' – Kwabena Adu-Boahene defends GH¢5.1m presidential vehicle purchase

The erstwhile caput of the now-defunct National Security Bureau (NSB), Kwabena Adu-Boahene, has claimed that the GH¢5.1 cardinal expenditure presently nether probe was utilized to procure vehicles for past President-elect John Dramani Mahama.

In a missive written from EOCO custody, wherever helium is presently connected remand, Adu-Boahene presented what helium described arsenic a summary of “Special Operations Expenditure” carried retired during the delicate modulation play pursuing the 2024 wide elections.

The erstwhile NSB boss, who faces aggregate charges including stealing, wealth laundering and causing fiscal nonaccomplishment to the state, has powerfully denied immoderate wrongdoing.

He maintains that each expenditures during his tenure were lawful and aligned with nationalist information interests.

“I americium not a thief. All funds were expended successful bully religion and successful work to the Republic,” Adu-Boahene claimed.

He explained that the vehicles procured were indispensable for the logistical needs of the incoming President and his team.

According to him, the transactions were executed nether “urgent and classified directives.”

“All disbursements made nether my enactment astatine the NSB were authorised and linked straight to nationalist information operations,” helium stated.

Kwabena Adu-Boahene has officially been charged with 11 counts of stealing, including the alleged transportation of GH¢49 cardinal (approximately $7 million) from the bureau’s relationship to his idiosyncratic account, among different offenses.

The suit, which was filed astatine the High Court successful Accra, besides had 3 different accused persons, including the woman of Adu-Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng; his company, Advantage Solutions Limited; and a banker, Mildred Donkor.

The charges filed against the accused persons included: stealing, contrary to Section 124(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29); conspiracy to steal, contrary to Sections 23(1) and 124(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960; and defrauding by mendacious pretences, contrary to Section 131(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).

Some of the different charges against them are: wilfully causing fiscal nonaccomplishment to the state, contrary to Section 179A(3)(a) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29); utilizing nationalist bureau for profit, contrary to Section 179C(a) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29); and collaboration to perpetrate a crime, to wit, utilizing nationalist bureau for profit, contrary to Section 179C(b) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).

See his summary below