Amasaman High Court Adjourns Nana Agradaa Appeal, Sets February 5 for Judgment

Date of Report: January 21, 2026 | Location: Amasaman, Ghana

Introduction

The legal saga surrounding Patricia Asiedua Asiamah, popularly known as Nana Agradaa, has entered a critical phase. On Wednesday, January 21, 2026, the Amasaman High Court presided over the latest procedural hearing regarding her appeal against a 15-year custodial sentence. The court has officially adjourned the proceedings and set a definitive date for the final verdict.

This development marks a pivotal moment in a high-profile case that has gripped public attention, involving the transformation of a former fetish priestess into an evangelist and subsequent legal battles regarding financial fraud. The court’s decision to set a judgment date follows delays attributed to procedural and technical challenges. This article provides a comprehensive breakdown of the case, the current status of the appeal, and the implications of the upcoming ruling scheduled for February 5, 2026.

Key Points

Background

To understand the gravity of the current appeal, it is necessary to examine the origins of the case. Patricia Asiedua Asiamah, widely known as Nana Agradaa, rose to prominence as a traditional priestess before publicly converting to Christianity and becoming an evangelist. However, her transition was marred by legal scrutiny regarding her past business practices.

The Conviction and Sentencing

On July 3, 2025, the Amasaman High Court found Nana Agradaa guilty on multiple counts. The charges centered on charlatanic advertising—a specific offense under Ghanaian law prohibiting the promotion of magical or supernatural claims for commercial gain—and defrauding by false pretense. These charges stemmed from allegations that she defrauded individuals of significant sums of money under the guise of providing spiritual solutions.

The court subsequently sentenced her to a 15-year custodial sentence. This ruling was a significant development in the regulation of “spiritual” commerce in Ghana, serving as a precedent for the enforcement of laws against fraudulent traditional practices.

Transition from Priestess to Evangelist

The case is unique due to the defendant’s public persona. Nana Agradaa’s transition from a fetish priestess to an evangelist was highly publicized. While her conversion was viewed by some as a genuine spiritual awakening, the prosecution argued that the alleged fraud occurred prior to or during her time as a traditional priestess. The defense maintains that the trial and subsequent conviction were influenced by her controversial public image rather than factual evidence.

Analysis

The current appeal process highlights several critical aspects of the Ghanaian judicial system, particularly regarding the handling of complex evidence and procedural compliance.

Grounds for Appeal

Nana Agradaa’s defense team, led by Richard Asare Baffour, has built her appeal on three main pillars:

1. Insufficiency of Evidence: The defense argues that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that fraudulent acts occurred. They contend that the evidence presented during the initial trial was circumstantial or lacked the necessary technical verification.
2. Procedural Irregularities: The defense alleges that the trial was “incorrect,” suggesting potential errors in how the court handled the admission of evidence or the conduct of the trial.
3. Sentencing Disparity: The 15-year sentence is being challenged as excessive. In criminal appeals, sentences are often scrutinized to ensure they align with sentencing guidelines and the principle of proportionality relative to the offense committed.

Technical Challenges and Digital Evidence

A significant factor contributing to the delay in the appeal hearing was the issue of digital evidence. In modern fraud cases, evidence often includes electronic records, such as transaction logs, audio recordings, or digital advertisements.

The Attorney-General’s Office reportedly faced technical difficulties in presenting or verifying this digital evidence for the appeal. This underscores a growing challenge in the judicial system: the need for robust digital infrastructure to handle electronic evidence securely and efficiently. The failure to comply with court directives regarding these technicalities led to the procedural vacuum that necessitated the adjournment.

Procedural Dynamics: The Court vs. The State

The hearing on January 21, 2026, revealed a tension between the prosecution’s need for time and the court’s need for finality. The Attorney-General’s Office requested further time to file submissions—a common tactic to ensure arguments are thoroughly prepared. However, the defense opposed this, citing the length of time already taken.

The court’s decision was a compromise: it set a fixed date for judgment (February 5, 2026) while technically leaving the door open for the Attorney-General to file written addresses. However, the setting of a judgment date implies that the court is prepared to rule based on the existing record if no new submissions are filed in time.

Practical Advice

While this case is specific to Nana Agradaa, it offers broader lessons for the public, legal practitioners, and business owners.

Understanding Charlatanic Advertising Laws

For individuals operating in the spiritual or traditional healing space, it is vital to understand the legal boundaries. In Ghana, the Charlatanic Advertising Prohibition Act, 1972 (NRCD 372) strictly prohibits the advertisement of magical or supernatural powers for commercial purposes.

Advice: Ensure that all business practices, particularly those involving claims of spiritual intervention, comply with advertising regulations. Avoid making specific guarantees of results through supernatural means, as this can attract criminal liability.

Managing Digital Evidence in Legal Disputes

The delays in Nana Agradaa’s appeal highlight the importance of digital forensics. Whether for prosecution or defense, the integrity of digital evidence is paramount.

Advice: If involved in a legal dispute involving digital records (emails, social media posts, audio recordings), ensure that evidence is preserved in its original format. Use hash values to verify integrity and ensure that all metadata is intact. Legal teams should invest in digital tools to manage these submissions efficiently to avoid technical delays.

Appeal Process Awareness

For litigants, understanding that appeals are not retrials but reviews of legal errors is crucial. Nana Agradaa is not re-arguing the facts of the case (in most instances) but arguing that the law was applied incorrectly.

Advice: If you lose a case, consult with an appellate attorney immediately. Strict timelines apply for filing notices of appeal. Be prepared for the process to take time, as appeals involve complex written arguments and often face docket congestion.

FAQ

Conclusion

The upcoming judgment on February 5, 2026, represents a defining moment for Patricia Asiedua Asiamah (Nana Agradaa). After months of legal wrangling and procedural delays, the Amasaman High Court is poised to deliver a final ruling on whether her conviction stands or is overturned.

This case serves as a significant study of the intersection between traditional practices, modern commerce, and the law. It also highlights the procedural rigor of the Ghanaian court system, where technical compliance and the timely presentation of evidence are as critical as the substantive arguments. As the date approaches, stakeholders across the legal and religious sectors will be watching closely to see how the court balances the scales of justice in this high-profile appeal.

Sources

• Life Pulse Daily: Original report on court proceedings dated January 21, 2026.
• Amasaman High Court Records: Case files regarding Republic v. Patricia Asiedua Asiamah (Nana Agradaa).
• Charatatic Advertising Prohibition Act, 1972 (NRCD 372): Legal framework for prosecution.
• Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29): Sections regarding defrauding by false pretense.