27/07/2026
WONTUMI COULD HAVE ESCAPE JAIL IF THE LAWYERS WERE ABLE TO GATHER ENOUGH GROUNDS IN HIS DEFENSE - Emmanuel Arthur (C.EO of ASIG)
A careful review of the court proceedings and the ruling indicates that some of the challenges facing the defense stem from the legal strategy adopted by Mr. Bernard Antwi Boasiako’s (Chairman Wontumi) lawyers, and we conclude that his lawyers failed to do the needful. Rather than directing public attention toward allegations of unfair treatment, the legal team should critically assess whether all the necessary legal and evidential steps were taken to defend their client effectively. If they were able to gather more technical grounds, Chairman Wontumi could have escaped being sentenced to jail. In our view, there were important aspects of the case that appear not to have been adequately addressed. For example, it appears that the defense did not fully challenge or cross-examine the prosecution’s second witness (PW2) on issues that may have been relevant to the case.
However, they failed to coach Chairman Wontumi to admit to the court that he gave the land to the witness to mine and that all activities carried out on the land were undertaken with his authorization and within the scope of his company’s legal mining license.
Furthermore, Akonta Mining is reportedly licensed by the Minerals Commission. This raises legitimate questions about the role of the relevant regulatory authorities. If the company was operating under a valid license, the public deserves clarity on how allegations of illegal mining arose and what oversight actions were taken by the Minerals Commission. We believe these are some important issues that should have been thoroughly examined and supported with credible evidence during the proceedings. If the defense fails to present all relevant facts and documentary evidence, the court will inevitably determine the case based on the evidence placed before it. We urge the legal team to concentrate on strengthening their legal case by gathering more technical grounds, or else they may lose the other pending case. We advice the legal team to gather the needed technical grounds; if they can, they could turn the case into an institutional failure because the case is clearly an institutional failure.