The Former Legal Counsel for Chairman Wontumi, Andy Appiah-Kubi has explained that the 20 year-sentence handed to Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, follows charges connected to mining regulations and not illegal mining offences. He stated that the case is on issues involving the transfer of mining interests and the provision of mining support services under Ghana’s mining laws.
Addressing the development, the Ghanaian Lawyer, Mr Appiah-Kubi, clarified that the proceedings before the court did not involve accusations of illegal mining activities. According to him, the charges dealt with specific requirements under the Minerals and Mining Act relating to approvals needed before certain transactions or activities could take place.
“The impression that Chairman Wontumi has been prosecuted for illegal mining is incorrect. The charges are not in any way close to illegal mining or related offences.”
Andy Appiah-Kubi
Furthermore, Mr Appiah-Kubi explained that one of the matters before the court involved the assignment of a mining lease interest to another person without the required approval from the Minister responsible for Mines. He noted that transferring an interest in a mining concession remains possible under the law when the necessary procedures are followed.
The Ghanaian Lawyer stated that the law requires a formal assignment document known as a conveyance to demonstrate the transfer of an interest in land or a mining concession. He added that the legal requirement focuses on obtaining ministerial approval before such a transfer can take effect.
Discussing the second area of the case, Mr Appiah-Kubi explained that the charges also involved the facilitation of mining support services on a concession without the required authorisation. He indicated that mining support activities can be provided legally when the service provider obtains the appropriate licence from the relevant authorities.
From his perspective, understanding the legal foundation of the charges remains important in assessing the court proceedings. He argued that the issues before the court related to regulatory compliance within the mining sector and required careful interpretation of the applicable laws.
Additionally, Mr Appiah Kubi referenced provisions under the Land Act concerning the transfer of interests in land. He explained that a valid transfer requires proper documentation to establish that an assignment has taken place according to legal procedures.
Mining Licence Issues Shape Debate After Judgment
Addressing the second count connected to the case, the Ghanaian Lawyer, Mr Andy Appiah-Kubi, explained that mining support services are permitted under Ghana’s mining laws when the required approvals are obtained from the relevant authorities. He said the responsibility for securing such certification rests with the service provider carrying out the activity on a concession.
According to Wontumi’s former Legal Counsel, the law requires individuals or companies offering mining support services to obtain a licence from the Minister responsible for Mines before commencing operations. He explained that the legal obligation applies to the party providing the service and guides how mining activities are conducted within the sector.
“The responsibility is on the person providing the mining support services to apply for certification. It is not the miner’s obligation to apply for that licence.”
Andy Appiah-Kubi
Furthermore, the former legal representative explained that the defence team had requested documents relating to the assignment of mining interests and ownership records of items presented during proceedings. He stated that the application was dismissed by the court, preventing the defence from receiving the requested materials through that process.
Discussing the evidence presented during the trial, Mr Appiah Kubi said the defence position centred on the purpose of the agreement involving the reclamation of degraded land and agricultural plans. He explained that Chairman Wontumi had engaged PW2 to restore damaged land and develop coconut farming activities after the restoration process.
Additionally, Mr Appiah Kubi made reference to testimony from witnesses who appeared before the court, including PW1 and PW2. He stated that the accounts provided during the proceedings formed part of the issues considered in determining the case.
The Ghanaian Lawyer noted that one witness indicated that mining activities had taken place alongside the reclamation arrangement, an issue that became part of the legal arguments presented before the court. He explained that the interpretation of responsibility under mining regulations remained a key element throughout the proceedings.
In addition, Mr Appiah-Kubi highlighted the importance of licensing procedures within Ghana’s mining sector. From his perspective, regulatory requirements provide a framework for determining how companies and individuals should operate when engaging in activities linked to mining concessions.
READ ALSO: NPP Convenes Crucial Meeting over Wontumi’s 20-Year Conviction
