Wontumi Seeks Supreme Court Intervention on Mining Act Provisions

Accra: Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), has formally requested that the High Court in Accra refer specific provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act to the Supreme Court for interpretation. This request arises in the context of a legal case concerning the alleged leasing of his mining concession at Samreboi in the Western Region, a move purportedly in violation of the Minerals and Mining Act. According to Ghana Web, Antwi-Boasiako's legal representative, Samuel Atta Akye, has argued that if the court, under the jurisdiction of Justice Audrey Kocuvi-Tay, declines to escalate the case to the Supreme Court, then the court should acquit and discharge his client. This argument was part of a comprehensive 50-page written address submitted to the court, which is slated to deliver its judgment on July 20. Akyea is pushing for the Supreme Court to evaluate whether the interpretation of Article 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution aligns with Section 14(1) of the Mine rals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703). He contends that this particular section, which forms a basis for the charges against Antwi-Boasiako, is potentially legally vague, excessively broad, and inconsistent with the Constitution, rendering it unconstitutional, null, and void. Boasiako, who is aspiring to become the National Chairman of the NPP, has entered a plea of not guilty to allegations of assigning mineral rights without the necessary approval and intentionally facilitating an unlicensed mining operation. The Office of the Attorney General has filed criminal charges against three individuals, including Antwi-Boasiako, a shareholder of Akonta Mining, and Kwame Antwi, a director of the company. Antwi, who faces similar charges, is currently evading authorities. The prosecution has called upon four witnesses to provide testimony against Boasiako and Akonta Mining. Among them, Henry Okum, a small-scale miner, testified about a verbal agreement with Boasiako for mining activities on the concession at Samrebo i. The court had previously established a prima facie case against Boasiako, prompting him to present his defense, although his submission of the case to answer was dismissed.