The Minority in Parliament on Monday condemned the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice for allegedly ordering the arrest and raiding of homes of former government appointees.

The Minority Caucus urged the media, civil society organisations (CSOs) and well-meaning Ghanaians to stand up against the growing trend of intimidation through state institutions including the National Intelligence Bureau (NIB) and National Security operatives.

Mr Jerry Ahmed Shiab, the Second Deputy Minority Whip and Member of Parliament for Weija-Gbawe, who addressed the media on behalf of the Caucus at Parliament House, Accra, said such political intimidations and harassment were relics of the coup era and had no place in a democratic dispensation.

He added that the Minority was not against prosecution of individuals who had committed any offence but should be taken through the courts or legal system, and not the use of brute force and political intimidation.

The Caucus expressed its readiness to defend the country’s democracy and the rule of law, noting that “If our institutions are to command public confidence, they must act with integrity, fairness, and respect for individual rights”.

In a related development, Lawyers for Kwabena Adu-Boahene, the former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau (NSB), and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, have accused Attorney-General Dr

Dominic Ayine of violating their clients’ rights by publicly declaring them guilty before trial.
Their concerns follow a press conference held by the Attorney-General on Monday, March 24, 2025, where Dr Ayine linked Adu-Boahene’s arrest to an alleged $7 million fraud involving a cybersecurity contract.

In a statement issued by legal firm Zoe, Akyea & Co., the lawyers described the Attorney-General’s remarks as “prejudicial”, arguing that they amounted to a public conviction while investigations were still ongoing.

The legal team further accused Dr Ayine of engaging in a “trial by media”, arguing that the Attorney-General had “cheapened the press conference by pronouncing their clients guilty in the court of public opinion.”

They maintained that prosecution must be based on evidence and due process, rather than public narratives that could prejudice judicial proceedings.

Adu-Boahene’s lawyers have vowed to challenge what they describe as “unmitigated prejudice with defamatory consequences”, insisting that their clients are being unfairly targeted.

They also warned that any attempts to undermine their right to a fair trial would be contested in the appropriate legal forum.