|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Introduction
Ghana’s High Court has convicted and sentenced a key opposition figure, Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, to 20 years in prison for illegal mining, popularly known as galamsey.
The development has sparked controversy in the country, with the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) alleging that the conviction was part of a broader attempt by the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC) to silence opposition voices in the West African country.
What was the allegation?
Chairman Wontumi, the NPP Ashanti Regional Chairperson and a prominent entrepreneur, is one of two shareholders and directors of Akonta Mining Company Limited, a small-scale mining company with a mining concession at Samreboi, a suburb of the country’s Western Region.
The company received its mining lease from the country’s Lands Ministry on July 23, 2021. (See page 21 of the Court’s judgement and the Minerals Commission’s statement)
Court records sighted by DUBAWA showed that the police arrested at least 29 people, including one Michael Gyadu Ayisi, in the Samreboi Forest “within and around” the mining concession of Akonta Mining on April 17, 2025.
This arrest, which was part of a special operation christened “Anti-Galamsey,” happened at a time when the country was battling the scourge of illegal mining that experts, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minerals Commission, claimed was destroying the waterbodies and environment.
The men were said to be occupying a structure with Akonta Mining’s name boldly written thereon, and police retrieved several items, including eight pump-action guns, one single-barrelled gun, five pieces of metal suspected of being gold in a sachet, and four machetes. (See pages 5 and 6 of the Court’s judgment).
The other items retrieved from the men included several water-pumping machines, 310 AAA/BB cartridges, one grease gun, four motorcycles, two vehicles, 25 serviceable excavators, four non-serviceable excavators, and a total of GH₵157,000. (See pages 5 and 6 of the Court’s judgment).
When interrogated by the police, Michael Gyadu Ayisi allegedly identified one Henry Okum as his employer on the concession. Henry was arrested, and he allegedly told investigators that his presence on the concession was based on an oral arrangement with Chairman Wontumi, a shareholder of Akonta Mining, in Sept. 2024.
According to Court records, Henry, who identified himself as a miner, reportedly told investigators that Chairman Wontumi assigned a portion of Akonta Mining’s unmined concession to him to conduct his mining activities while helping to reclaim the portion already mined.
The Court established that Henry Okum and his 29 employees, including Michael Gyadu Ayisi, carried out various mining-related activities on a concession given to Akonta Mining with the sole permission of Chairman Wontumi, without the appropriate ministerial permit as required by the country’s mining law.
What was Chairman Wontumi charged with?
With the above facts, the State brought an action against Chairman Wontumi, Akonta Mining Limited, and Kwame Antwi, identified as the second shareholder and director of Akonta Mining, who was at large during the trial.
The three accused persons were charged with six counts for various breaches of the country’s mining law under two main offences namely, assignment of mineral rights without approval, contrary to Section 14(1) and Section 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended, and purposely facilitating an unlicensed mining operation, contrary to Section 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended. (See page 4 of the Court’s judgment)
Ghana’s parent mining law, the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), as amended, forbids authorised leaseholders from assigning their interest or right to any other person or entity without the appropriate or prior sanction of the country’s Lands Minister. (See Section 14(1) of Act 703 as amended)
The law prescribes various punishments for leaseholders who allow or encourage unauthorised persons to carry out mining activities on their concession. (See Section 99(2)(b) of Act 703 as amended)
What was Chairman Wontumi’s response in court?
Chairman Wontumi told the Court he employed Henry Okum solely to help in the reclamation of Akonta Mining’s mined portion of the concession.
His defence in Court was that at no point did he agree with Henry and his men to undertake illegal mining on Akonta Mining’s concession as alleged by the State.
Wontumi challenged the Prosecution to produce any document indicating that he duly assigned the unmined portion to Henry for purposes of illegal mining. Court records showed that Wontumi maintained that if, at any time, Henry engaged in any illegal mining on Akonta Mining’s unmined concession, that was done at his blindside and without his prior knowledge or permission.
When questioned why he helped Henry to secure excavators and other heavy-duty equipment from one source, Wontumi replied that his assistance was purely in furtherance of the reclamation work he had assigned to the said gentleman and nothing more.
Although he could not produce a written agreement on the alleged reclamation contract, Wontumi maintained he never employed Henry to mine on Akonta Mining’s unmined concession.
During the trial, Henry and Michael both served as witnesses for the State and repeated their claim before the Court.
Judge’s decision after the trial:
After considering the evidence presented at the trial, the High Court found Chairman Wontumi and Akonta Mining Company Limited guilty of several offences under the Minerals and Mining Act. (See pages 55 to 57 of the Court judgment).
The court concluded that the prosecution had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the mineral rights had been unlawfully assigned or made available to third parties and that unlicensed mining had been deliberately facilitated.
The court rejected the argument that Chairman Wontumi could avoid criminal responsibility simply because the concession belonged to a company. One of the most significant legal aspects of the judgment was the court’s decision to hold Chairman Wontumi personally liable.
Under Company Law, a company is regarded as a separate legal entity from its shareholders and directors. However, where the evidence demonstrates that an individual was the directing mind behind the commission of criminal offences, the law permits personal criminal liability (See pages 52 and 53 of the Court’s judgment).
The trial judge found that Chairman Wontumi exercised substantial control over the operations that gave rise to the offences and was directly involved in the unlawful conduct. Consequently, both the company and its controlling officer, Wontumi, were held accountable.
The court imposed a sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment, each with hard labour, on Chairman Wontumi for the two counts. Although imposing custodial sentences on the two counts, which should have totalled 40 years’ imprisonment, the judge, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, ordered that they run concurrently, meaning he is to serve an effective prison term of 20 years rather than consecutive sentences.
The court also imposed financial penalties on both Chairman Wontumi and Akonta Mining Company Limited in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law.
Explaining the reason for her sentence on page 58 of the judgment, Justice Kocuvie-Tay noted:
“The offences in this case relate to illegal exploitation of mineral resources, which are the property of the State. The conduct of the 1st and 3rd accused persons undermines the regulatory framework for the mining sector and contributes to environmental degradation associated with illegal mining.”
Post judgment commentaries:
The opposition New Patriotic Party has rejected the Court’s decision, describing Chairman Wontumi as a “political prisoner.”
At a press briefing shortly after the judgment, NPP General-Secretary, Justin Kodua Frimpong, said Chairman Wontumi was convicted for no offence committed since his mining company had a legitimate mining lease to be on the concession.
“Wontumi has been convicted in circumstances where there was no evidence at all to support a conviction in respect of the offence for which he has been convicted,” he said.
He explained that “It was never disputed that Chairman Wontumi lawfully acquired his mineral concession; it was never disputed… the central question was whether that concession had been assigned or transferred in violation of the law.”
Justin said the party has instructed their lawyers to challenge the judge’s decision in the country’s Court of Appeal.
“It is our respected view that no evidence was adduced before the court, establishing any assignment or transfer of mineral rights by Chairman Wontumi. The prosecution could not produce any evidence to show that Wontumi had assigned his mineral rights. Instead, the conviction rested on assumptions and inferences, which in our view could not amount to proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That is why we firmly believe that his conviction is a travesty of justice and has to be overturned on appeal,” he said.
But some anti-graft and anti-illegal mining campaigners, including lawyer Martin Kpebu, have welcomed the decision, describing it as consequential for the country’s fight against illegal mining.
Labelling the judgment as a “sound decision,” Martin said the judge made no mistake in her decision.
“After listening to the judge, I found what I heard very sound. She’s done a good job. It takes a lot of bravery to make this decision; not everyone can issue such a ruling. I felt that Ghana is working again…today he’s (Wontumi) been shown his real size,” he told Accra-based TV3.
Conclusion
Chairman Wontumi has the right to appeal against the judge’s decision as provided for under the country’s 1992 Constitution. If successful on appeal, the second-highest court may acquit and discharge him or may reduce his sentence.
