Wontumi Denies Authorising Mining on Akonta Concession, Says PW2 Was Only Planting Coconuts
Ashanti Regional NPP Chairman Bernard Antwi‑Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, has strongly denied claims that he authorised prosecution witness Henry Okum (PW2) to mine on Akonta Mining’s concession, insisting their arrangement was strictly for land reclamation and coconut planting.
Testifying in his own defence on Thursday, May 21, at the Accra High Court, Wontumi—who is standing trial alongside Akonta Mining on charges including assigning mineral rights without ministerial approval—said PW2 was only permitted onto the concession to reclaim degraded land.
“I didn’t give him permission to mine,” he told the court.
“He came to reclaim the land and plant coconut trees so that when the coconuts mature, we would share.”
Before opening his defence, the accused had called two witnesses: mining expert Wisdom Gomashie and former Deputy Lands Minister George Mireku Duker.
Cross‑Examination: Prosecution Challenges His Account
Under cross‑examination by Deputy Attorney‑General Dr. Justice Srem‑Sai, Wontumi admitted allowing PW2 access to the concession but maintained it was solely for reclamation—not mining.
He denied ever assisting PW2 to acquire excavators or earth‑moving equipment.
“That is not true. I do not know what work he did. He only planted trees and carried out reclamation,” he said.
The prosecution, however, argued that Wontumi knowingly permitted mining activities and deliberately stayed away from the concession to avoid direct association.
Justice Srem‑Sai suggested that PW2 was a known small‑scale miner and that Wontumi allowed him onto the concession for mining purposes. Wontumi rejected the claim, saying PW2 introduced himself as a “service support miner,” not someone seeking to mine illegally.
The prosecution further alleged that Wontumi’s “business model” involved acquiring mining leases and allowing others to mine illegally in exchange for a share of the proceeds—known in galamsey circles as “goodwill” or “percentage.”
Wontumi dismissed the allegation as a “blatant falsehood.”
Judge’s Earlier Ruling Cited PW2’s Testimony
In an earlier ruling directing Wontumi to open his defence, presiding judge Justice Audrey Kocuvie‑Tay cited PW2’s testimony and Wontumi’s own caution statement.
PW2 had told the court:
“A1 agreed that I mine on the unmined portions of the concession… I was expected to use a portion of the proceeds from my mining activities to defray the cost of reclamation.”
The judge noted that Wontumi admitted allowing PW2 onto the concession “only to plant coconut trees,” but questioned how PW2 was expected to fund reclamation without financial support.
“Essential to the believability of PW2’s testimony is the fact that A1 did not give PW2 funds for the reclamation exercise… How else did A1 expect PW2 to fund the reclamation exercise?” the ruling stated.
No Written Agreement, No Site Visits
During Thursday’s proceedings, Wontumi acknowledged that he had no written agreement with PW2 documenting the reclamation arrangement.
“I have no documentation with PW2 apart from the instruction to reclaim the land and plant trees,” he said.
He also admitted he never visited the site after granting PW2 access, though he claimed PW2 sent him videos showing reclamation works and the planting of about 18,000 coconut trees.