I find Wontumi's 20-year sentence very problematic — Manhyia South MP
The Member of Parliament for Manhyia South, Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah, has stated that he finds the conviction of the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, problematic.
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.
Reacting to the judgment on Accra-based Channel One TV's The Point of View on the same day, the Manhyia South MP argued that the mere presence of individuals carrying out activities on a mining concession does not automatically prove that the concession holder unlawfully assigned his mineral rights.
"It is not enough to draw sin from circumstantial evidence. Because I can allow you to come and do business on my land, and I may not have assigned my interest in the land to you," the lawmaker said.
The lawmaker argued that an assignment of mineral rights must be supported by documentary or other independent evidence, noting that the absence of direct evidence made the court's conclusion questionable.
"If, as the judge has acknowledged, there was no witness to the arrangement, for which reason there cannot be a testimony either in support or to the contrary, it is very difficult to determine that merely because somebody is on my land working, I've assigned my interest in the land to that person. That is why I'm saying that I find this judgment very problematic," he stated.