An EOCO investigator has told the Accra High Court that the account from which the GH¢49.1 million at the centre of the National Signals Bureau (NSB) trial was transferred was a state account belonging to the agency.

Frank Marshall Cromwell, an EOCO Staff Officer and the fourth prosecution witness in the trial of former NSB Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene, made the assertion under cross-examination after defence counsel Samuel Atta Akyea challenged the prosecution’s description of the account.

Mr Atta Akyea suggested that the account in question, known as the Coordinator’s Account-NSC, was not a public account.

“I put it to you that your designation of the Coordinator’s account-NSC, as a public account or State BNC account is erroneous,” the defence lawyer told the witness.

Mr Cromwell rejected the suggestion.

“I disagree because the head of Finance of the Bureau of National Communications listed accounts operated by the Bureau of National Communications which included the Director BNC account at Fidelity Bank.”

The witness further testified that investigations established the account was opened on the instructions of the National Security Coordinator for the operational activities of the Bureau of National Communications, the predecessor of the National Signals Bureau.

“I am aware that the account known as the Director BNC account was created on the instructions of the National Security Coordinator for operational purposes of the Bureau of National Communications.”

The prosecution alleges that GH¢49.1 million meant for the purchase of a cyber defence system was unlawfully diverted from the NSB through a series of transactions involving private accounts and companies linked to the accused persons.

Meanwhile, proceedings in court also revealed that the defence may require additional time to complete its cross-examination of the prosecution’s fourth witness.

Presiding judge Justice Francis Ato Achibonga questioned Mr Atta Akyea on how much longer he intended to continue with the cross-examination, noting that the witness had already spent six weeks in the witness box.

“Counsel, I always allow defence lawyers all the time to cross-examine witnesses in these cases, but the court also has a duty to manage the case. The witness has been in the box for six weeks; how far do you want to go?”

In response, Mr Atta Akyea said there were still several outstanding issues to address, including matters relating to disclosures ordered by the Court of Appeal on May 28, 2026. He also indicated that the defence could seek further directions from the appellate court on those disclosures.

According to the defence lawyer, he is only about “60%” through his cross-examination of the witness.

The prosecution had initially expected to close its case this week after calling four witnesses. However, the prolonged cross-examination means the trial is likely to continue beyond that timeline.