The High Court in Accra has convicted Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, and Akonta Mining Limited in a landmark illegal mining case, imposing lengthy prison sentences and substantial financial penalties after finding both guilty of offences under Ghana’s mining laws.
Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay sentenced Wontumi to 20 years’ imprisonment on each of the two counts for which he was convicted. The sentences will run concurrently, meaning he will serve a maximum of 20 years in prison.
In addition to the custodial sentence, the court fined Wontumi 10,000 penalty units on each count. Akonta Mining Limited, which was also convicted on two charges, was ordered to pay 15,000 penalty units for each offence.
Court Finds Prosecution Proved Its Case
Delivering judgment, Justice Kocuvie-Tay held that the prosecution had established all the essential elements of the offences beyond reasonable doubt.
The court found Wontumi guilty on Count One, relating to the unlawful assignment of mineral rights without the approval of the Minister responsible for Lands and Natural Resources, and on Count Four, which concerned the purposeful facilitation of unlawful mining activities.
Akonta Mining Limited was convicted on the corresponding corporate charges—Counts Three and Six.
Before delivering judgment, the court dismissed a defence application seeking to postpone the ruling and refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court.
The defence argued that Section 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act conflicted with Article 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution. However, Justice Kocuvie-Tay ruled that the provision was clear and did not require constitutional interpretation.
Quoting established legal precedent, the judge stated that constitutional referrals are only necessary where there is genuine ambiguity in the law, adding that disagreements over Parliament’s legislative choices do not constitute constitutional questions.
Unapproved Transfer of Mining Rights
The court ruled that Akonta Mining unlawfully allowed another individual, Henry Okum, to exercise mining rights on its concession without obtaining the mandatory ministerial approval required under the Minerals and Mining Act.
Evidence presented by the Minerals Commission showed that no approval had been sought or granted, a fact that was not disputed by the accused during the trial.
The defence maintained that Okum had only been engaged to reclaim degraded portions of the concession. However, the court concluded that the evidence demonstrated he was actively undertaking mining operations.
Justice Kocuvie-Tay relied on Okum’s testimony that he financed reclamation activities through proceeds from mining on portions of the concession. The judge noted that this evidence remained unchallenged during cross-examination and rejected Wontumi’s explanation that the arrangement was intended to support future coconut farming, describing the claim as an afterthought.
Court Holds Wontumi Personally Responsible
Although companies are generally treated as separate legal entities, the court ruled that the circumstances justified lifting Akonta Mining’s corporate veil.
Justice Kocuvie-Tay found that the company lacked an effectively functioning board of directors and that Wontumi exercised direct control over its operations.
As a result, the court held him personally liable for offences committed through the company, concluding that he acted as the de facto controller of the mining lease.
Illegal Mining Facilitation Established
On the charges relating to facilitating unlawful mining, the court found that Wontumi and Akonta Mining deliberately enabled mining activities without the approvals required by law.
The judgment cited evidence that Wontumi granted Henry Okum access to the concession and introduced him to an individual who assisted in acquiring an excavator used in the mining operations.
The court held that these actions demonstrated deliberate facilitation of illegal mining rather than mere land reclamation, as argued by the defence.
Defence Arguments Rejected
Justice Kocuvie-Tay dismissed several legal arguments advanced by the defence, including claims that the phrase “otherwise deal with” under the Minerals and Mining Act should be interpreted narrowly.
The court also rejected submissions that the absence of written agreements undermined the prosecution’s case, ruling that informal arrangements can still constitute criminal conduct where the law has been breached.
Convictions and Penalties
Following the judgment:
- Bernard Antwi Boasiako (Chairman Wontumi) was convicted of assigning mineral rights without ministerial approval and purposefully facilitating unlawful mining activities.
- Akonta Mining Limited was convicted of the corresponding corporate offences under the Minerals and Mining Act.
The convictions were secured under the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), as amended by the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2020 (Act 995), which introduced stiffer penalties for illegal mining-related offences.
The judgment is expected to become one of Ghana’s most significant legal decisions in the fight against illegal mining, reinforcing the courts’ readiness to hold both individuals and corporate entities accountable for breaches of the country’s mining laws.
