Wontumi's conviction was based on assumptions with no evidence — NPP alleges

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has rejected the conviction of its Ashanti Regional Chairman, Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi.

Chairman Wontumi, Akonta Mining Company Limited and the second accused, Kwame Antwi, who remains at large, were convicted on six counts relating to the unlawful assignment of mineral rights and purposely facilitating unlicensed mining operations within Akonta Mining's concession at Samreboi in the Western Region.

The prosecution said Wontumi, as owner and controlling director of Akonta Mining, permitted Henry Okum and Michael Gyedu Ayisi to undertake mining activities within the company's concession in 2024 without obtaining the mandatory written approval of the Minister responsible for mining, contrary to the Minerals and Mining Act.

An Accra High Court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie Tay on Monday, July 20, sentenced Chairman Wontumi to 20 years' imprisonment and imposed a fine of 10,000 penalty units, with an additional three-year custodial sentence in default of payment.

The sentences are to run concurrently.
However, the NPP describes the High Court's judgment as unsupported by evidence and based merely on assumptions.

The party said while it respects the authority of the courts, it strongly disagrees with the ruling and believes the prosecution failed to establish that Wontumi unlawfully assigned or transferred his mineral rights.

Addressing a press conference following an emergency meeting in Accra on Monday, July 20, NPP General Secretary Justin Kodua Frimpong also accused the government of applying selective justice in its fight against illegal mining.

"It is our considered view that Chairman 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. It was never disputed that Chairman Wontumi lawfully acquired his mineral concession," the NPP chief scribe stated.

He argued that the central issue before the court was whether the concession had been unlawfully assigned or transferred, arguing that the prosecution failed to present evidence proving such an assignment.

According to the NPP, the conviction was based on assumptions and inferences rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt, making it a miscarriage of justice that should be overturned by the appellate courts.

The opposition party further noted that its legal team had already begun the appellate process and expressed confidence that the conviction would be overturned.