The Former Legal Counsel For Chairman Wontumi, Andy Appiah-Kubi has argued that the 20 year sentence handed to Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, was not a fair reflection of the evidence and proceedings presented before the court. The Ghanaian Lawyer stated that his position is based on the charges, the court records and the legal issues considered during the trial.
Mr Appiah-Kubi also explained that his disappointment follows a disconnect between the evidence before the court and the final decision delivered in the case. He stressed that his comments were focused on the judicial process and not on personal issues involving Chairman Wontumi.
The former legal counsel said any discussion about the judgment should begin with a careful review of the court records and the arguments presented during the proceedings. According to him, examining the evidence would help the public understand whether the outcome was consistent with the legal requirements of the case.
“I am extremely disappointed with our criminal justice system. If it is justice from a court of law, it must be based on the evidence before the court.”
Andy Appiah-Kubi
Furthermore, Mr Appiah-Kubi stated that the appeal process remained an important avenue for reviewing the decision and ensuring that legal procedures were followed. He noted that the right to challenge a judgment forms part of the justice system and should be allowed to operate.
The Ghanaian Lawyer also warned about the long term effect of perceived unfairness within legal institutions. From his perspective, systems created today could affect different citizens in the future, regardless of their political position or social standing.
He urged individuals with influence to be mindful of how legal institutions are used, arguing that justice must apply equally to everyone. Mr Appiah-Kubi said the power held by individuals at a particular moment should not determine how legal processes are applied.
Additionally, the former legal counsel rejected attempts to link his comments to personal support for Chairman Wontumi. He clarified that his argument centred on the conduct of the proceedings, the charges brought against the accused and whether the final judgment followed the principles of justice.
The lawyer further cautioned against allowing political arguments and public campaigns to overshadow legal discussions surrounding the case. He encouraged commentators to study the proceedings before forming opinions about the outcome.
Mr Appiah-Kubi added that fairness within the justice system remained essential for protecting every citizen who may face similar legal circumstances in the future. He reiterated that the credibility of Ghana’s criminal justice system depends on decisions being guided by evidence, due process and equal treatment under the law.
Legal Debate Must Stay Within Court Records And Charges
The Ghanaian Lawyer, Andy Appiah-Kubi also called for public discussions on the case involving Chairman Wontumi to focus on the facts contained in the court records. He argued that issues outside the trial should not dominate conversations about the judgment.
Addressing the debate surrounding the 20-year sentence, Mr Appiah-Kubi stated that discussions about mining activities and personal opinions about individuals connected to the case were separate from the legal issues determined by the court. He encouraged commentators to examine the elements of the charges and the evidence presented during the proceedings.
The former legal counsel for Wontumi explained that the trial should be assessed through legal principles and not through public reactions or social media conversations. He stated that the character of individuals involved in the matter should not replace an examination of the prosecution’s case and the defence presented in court.
“Let us discuss the judgment within the context of the case, the evidence and the processes that came before the court.”
Andy Appiah-Kubi
According to Mr Appiah-Kubi, some public discussions moved into areas that were unrelated to the specific issues considered during the trial. He mentioned that conversations about illegal mining activities in general did not automatically form part of the case involving Chairman Wontumi.
Moreover, the lawyer urged contributors to understand the difference between social discussions and legal analysis. He explained that legal decisions are determined through evidence and applicable laws, not through public perception or the strength of opinions expressed outside the courtroom.
The former legal counsel also cautioned against connecting unrelated matters to the trial, including issues involving investigations or other activities outside the case before the court. He said such discussions could distract from the actual questions surrounding the charges and the judgment.
In addition, Mr Appiah-Kubi stated that the right to appeal remained an important part of the judicial process. He indicated that any challenge to the decision should follow the available legal channels instead of being driven by external debates.
He further urged commentators to approach the matter with accuracy and discipline by considering the prosecution’s arguments, the defence’s response and the final decision of the court. The lawyer reiterated that the case should be discussed based on its legal foundation and the evidence presented during proceedings.
READ ALSO: Wontumi Not Charged With Illegal Mining, Explains Appiah-Kubi
