Court Orders Wontumi To Answer Galamsey Charges

Wontumi

 

The Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Wontumi, and his company, Akonta Mining Limited have been ordered to mount a defence in the trial in which they have been accused of facilitating others to mine on the company’s concession at Samreboi without lawful authority.

A High Court presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, in a ruling on a submission of no case filed on behalf of the two, held that based on the evidence led by the Office of the Attorney General so far, there is a rebuttable presumption that Wontumi and his company have committed the offences they have been charged with.

It is the opinion of the court that the prosecution had made a case against the accused to warrant a defence, hence refusing their submission of no case to answer.

The court has, however, adjourned the case to March 26, 2026, for Wontumi to inform the court whether he would be mounting the witness box himself, call others to testify for him or exercise his right to remain silent pursuant to Article 19(10) of the 1992 Constitution which states that “No person who is tried for a criminal offence shall be compelled to give evidence at the trial.”

His lawyer, Andy Appiah Kubi, had prayed the court to give them some time to “decide the next course of action which may include an appeal” against the court’s decision on the submission of no case.

“We, therefore, pray for enough time to study the said ruling and take a decision that we will communicate on the next adjourned date,” he added.

Nana Ama Prempeh, a Senior State Attorney, opposed the prayer, indicating that the decision of the court could have gone either way therefore, the defence counsel ought to have discussed with his client the options available to him before appearing in court.

“Making the court aware of the option you choose is only going to give the court an opportunity to make further orders. The ruling is inconsequential at this stage,” she added.

Accusations

Wontumi is on trial on allegations he permitted other individuals to undertake mining on his Akonta Mining concession at Samreboi in the Western Region without a written approval from the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources.

He has been charged with one count of assignment of mineral rights without approval, and another count of purposely facilitating an unlicensed mining operation, contrary to Section 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended by Section 3 of the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 995).

His company, Akonta Mining and another person identified as Kwame Antwi, who is on the run, have been charged with the same offences. They have both denied the charges.

The prosecution called four witnesses to make its case against the accused persons and the company.

No Case

According to a submission of no case to answer filed by his lawyers, the prosecution’s case suffers from fundamental and fatal deficiencies, both in terms of the absence of evidence on essential elements and in terms of the quality and reliability of the evidence adduced.

It argues that the prosecution failed to adduce sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against them on all six (6) counts charged under the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended by the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 995).

AG Disagrees

But the Office of the Attorney General (AG), in a response, argued that they have made a case against the accused persons and, therefore, urged the court to dismiss the submission of no case and order them to mount a defence.

The prosecution averred that from the evidence, Wontumi facilitated Henry Okum as per the latter’s testimony, by handing over the concession to him for acts of reclamation of mined parts and mining on the unmined parts of the concession.

It further avers that it has proved, through evidence adduced, that not only have there been breaches of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) and its subsidiary legislations, but also that the accused persons deliberately, intentionally, and willfully permitted contraventions of these laws.

BY Gibril Abdul Razak

Read Full Story