The Criminal Division of the High Court in Accra has ordered the removal of an Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) lawyer from proceedings in the ongoing trial involving the former CEO of the National Food and Buffer Stock Company Limited, Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba, and four others.

The ruling was delivered on 29 April 2026 by Justice Francis Achibonga, a Court of Appeal judge sitting as an additional High Court judge.

The court expunged the name of EOCO lawyer Radiatu Abdulai after questions were raised over her authorisation to prosecute on behalf of the Republic.

The issue arose after counsel for the first accused, Godfred Yeboah Dame, challenged the Office of the Attorney-General’s decision to proceed with prosecution using a lawyer from EOCO, arguing there had been no proper legal authorisation.

Mr Dame cited provisions of the Law Officers Act, 1974 (NRCD 279) and the Legal Services Act, 1993, arguing that only duly authorised public officers, appointed through the required legal process, may appear in court on behalf of the Attorney-General or exercise prosecutorial powers.

He further anchored his argument on Article 88(4) of the Constitution, stating that while the Attorney-General may delegate functions, such delegation must be done “only in accordance with law,” and that such law must be consistent with Article 11 of the Constitution.

However, Principal State Attorney Esi Yankah countered that any directive issued by the Attorney-General under the Law Officers Act could not be questioned. She further argued that the presence of Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai in court alongside the EOCO officer amounted to sufficient authorisation.

But the court disagreed with that interpretation.

Justice Achibonga held that while a directive by the Attorney-General may not be questioned, the validity of the underlying authorisation itself can be scrutinised. He noted that authorisation must first comply with the law before it can be relied upon.

The judge further recalled that at a previous sitting, the court had directed the Attorney-General to produce evidence of authorisation for the EOCO lawyer to prosecute the case, but no such document had been presented.

“In the circumstances,” the court ruled, it would grant “a last chance” for the Attorney-General to provide any valid authorisation, if it existed.

Until then, the court ordered that the name of EOCO lawyer Radiatu Abdulai be removed from the record as counsel for the Republic in the matter.

The case has been adjourned to Tuesday, 5 May 2026, for further proceedings.

The ruling adds a new procedural twist to a closely watched prosecution, with the court now demanding clarity on the legal basis for EOCO’s role in the trial.