The High Court in Accra has sentenced Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), to 20 years’ imprisonment after finding him guilty of illegal mining-related offences.
Chairman Wontumi and his company, Akonta Mining Limited, were convicted on six charges, including the unlawful assignment of mineral rights without the required ministerial approval and facilitating illegal mining activities at the company’s Samreboi concession.
Delivering the judgment, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay ruled that the prosecution had successfully established its case against both Chairman Wontumi and Akonta Mining Limited.
The court held that the company allowed Henry Okoom and Michael Gyedu Ayisi to undertake mining activities on its concession without obtaining the necessary approval from the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources, thereby facilitating illegal mining.
In addition to the custodial sentence, the court imposed a GH¢120,000 fine on Chairman Wontumi, with a default sentence of three years’ imprisonment should he fail to pay the fine.
Court Relies on Circumstantial Evidence
Justice Kocuvie-Tay said the prosecution relied substantially on circumstantial evidence, noting that the defence did not dispute the absence of ministerial approval for the mining activities.
The court concluded that Akonta Mining Limited’s failure to seek the required approval amounted to an indication that the company had breached the law.
During his testimony, Chairman Wontumi maintained that he authorised Henry Okoom only to reclaim degraded land through coconut plantation and not to engage in mining.
He also told the court that he was unaware Okoom was involved in small-scale mining, explaining that Okoom had presented himself as a provider of mine support services.
However, the court rejected the explanation, describing it as unconvincing.
Okoom’s Testimony
The court found that Chairman Wontumi failed to provide evidence proving that Henry Okoom had the expertise required to undertake reclamation work.
It further relied on Okoom’s testimony that he engaged in mining on parts of the concession to recover expenses after failing to receive funds from Chairman Wontumi for the reclamation exercise.
Citing the legal principles on circumstantial evidence established in Duah v The Republic [1987-88] 1 GLR 343, the court held that the evidence pointed to one reasonable conclusion — that Chairman Wontumi knowingly permitted mining activities to take place on the concession.
The court also dismissed Chairman Wontumi’s claim that Okoom was expected to recover his costs from proceeds generated through the sale of matured coconuts, describing the explanation as an afterthought.
Corporate Veil Lifted
In a significant part of the ruling, the court lifted the corporate veil of Akonta Mining Limited, relying on exceptions established in Morkor v Kuma.
Justice Kocuvie-Tay held that the company lacked an active management structure or executive board and that Chairman Wontumi was the actual controlling mind behind the company’s operations during the period in question.
“The A3’s corporate veil should be lifted as there is no real difference between the two (Chairman Wontumi and Akonta) in relation to dealing with the persons permitted to mine,” the judge stated.
“There was no functioning management board and executive management board to deal with the company. All acts were done by Chairman Wontumi, the true de facto holder of the mineral right,” she added.
The ruling brings to an end a long-running legal case involving allegations of illegal mining activities linked to Akonta Mining Limited’s Samreboi concession.