Legal Practitioner Yaw Twumasi Ankrah has strongly defended the acquisition of the Black Volta Mining Project by Engineers & Planners (E&P), dismissing as “laughable” attempts by some critics to politicise the transaction.
In a detailed clarification, Lawyer Ankrah described the deal as a “purely commercial transaction between multiple private entities” and urged the public to steer clear of misinformation designed to serve political ends.
According to him, contrary to the narrative suggesting that the deal was politically motivated or influenced by the current administration, the origins of the transaction predate even the seven-month tenure of the current Mahama administration.
He stated that negotiations between E&P and Azumah Resources began well before the current political cycle and had already received all required statutory approvals from the previous government.
“I have seen some persons trying so hard to colour the transaction between E&P and Azumah Resources with political colours to achieve a certain goal of political equalization. Unfortunately for such persons, the history behind this transaction predates the life of the 7-month President Mahama government.”
Legal Practitioner Yaw Twumasi Ankrah
He emphasised that the transaction was not only longstanding but entirely commercial in nature, involving negotiations, contractual obligations, and financial arrangements typical of corporate dealings.
“To burst the bubble of those seeking to taint this purely commercial transaction between multiple private entities dealing at arm’s length, I will briefly state the following facts for the consideration of those who are minded to know”.
Legal Practitioner Yaw Twumasi Ankrah
Joint Development and Acquisition Agreement
Providing further context, Lawyer Ankrah noted that the shareholders of Azumah Resources and E&P entered into a Joint Development and Acquisition Agreement in 2023, following a series of negotiations that began as early as 2022.
Under the terms of this agreement, E&P was to provide funding totaling $100 million within a specified period. This funding was intended to support project development and eventually secure the transfer of Azumah’s shares.
However, Lawyer Ankrah disclosed that the process was not without its delays, stating that although E&P secured a funding facility, the shareholders initially did not accept it, resulting in a delay in the payment of the first tranche of the agreed sum.
According to him, despite this hiccup, both parties extended the payment period in good faith to keep the deal on course.
“E&P being aggrieved by some actions of the parties to the agreement, in October 2024 commenced arbitration in accordance with the terms of the agreement against the shareholders. The shareholders in their answer, counterclaimed for the agreed $100 million which is the acquisition and project development amount.”
Legal Practitioner Yaw Twumasi Ankrah
Lawyer Ankrah further disclosed that having counterclaimed for the $100 million, it became abundantly clear that the shareholders of Azumah were still interested in going forward with the transaction as agreed earlier.
This counterclaim, he explained, amounted to a tacit or implied admission that the original agreement still stood and should be executed.
He indicated that based on this understanding, E&P resumed its financial engagements to secure the necessary capital, adding that the ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID), after subjecting E&P to rigorous internal assessments, eventually agreed to fund the project.
This culminated in the signing ceremony that was widely publicised recently. Lawyer Ankrah pointed to this sequence of events to challenge the notion of any political interference or coercion in the acquisition process.
He also advised critics to deepen their understanding of legal and contractual principles before making public pronouncements that risk misleading the public.
“Before rushing to seek to score political points with a transaction which is above your appreciation, ask your lawyer friends or AI to explain these legal terms to you: counterclaim, implied admission, specific performance, and compromise”.
Legal Practitioner Yaw Twumasi Ankrah
The legal practitioner insisted that any claim of a hostile takeover or the use of political power to force the transaction is not only baseless but also indicative of what those making such claims might have done or did with political power themselves.
Yaw Twumasi Ankrah’s defence seeks to draw a clear line between politics and business, especially in the context of a mining sector that is often fraught with speculation and controversy.
For him, the E&P–Azumah Resources deal is a textbook example of a commercial agreement shaped by legal obligations, financial negotiations, and institutional due diligence—not by partisan agendas.
READ ALSO: Sam Jonah Defends E&P $100 million Gold Project Deal
