An Accra High Court has dismissed the submission of no case to answer presented by Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, and his company, Akonta Mining Company Limited, in their ongoing trial for alleged illegal mining activities.
The ruling was delivered this afternoon, Monday, March 16, 2026, by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay.
The decision means the prosecution has successfully established a prima facie case, obliging the accused persons to now open their defence by calling witnesses and presenting evidence to explain their side of the story.
Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, who has been leading the prosecution team, confirmed the outcome in a social media post shortly after the ruling.
“This afternoon, the High Court dismissed Chairman Wontumi’s submission of no case in The Republic v Bernard Antwi Boasiako, Kwame Antwi & Akonta Mining Company Ltd.
This means two things:
(1) That our illustrious State Attorneys have proven the allegations in the case, and (2) that if Chairman Wontumi fails to give a sensible explanation to the accusations, he will be convicted and punished.
The Court has since directed him and his Akonta Mining to explain their side of the story (if they have any explanations) by calling witnesses (if they have any witnesses to call),” Dr Sai wrote.
The case centres on allegations that Chairman Wontumi, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), along with co-accused Kwame Antwi (at large) and Akonta Mining Company Ltd, facilitated unauthorised mining operations on the company’s concession at Samreboi in the Western Region.
The prosecution claims that individuals identified as Henry Okum and Michael Gyedu Ayisi were permitted to carry out mining activities without the required approval from the Minister responsible for Lands and Natural Resources, in contravention of Ghana’s mining laws.
After the state closed its case earlier this year having called witnesses and tendered documentary evidence, including mineral rights documents and proof of the absence of statutory authorisation, the defence filed a no-case submission in February 2026, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to require a response.
Dr Srem-Sai had urged the court to reject the submission, maintaining that the prosecution had adduced credible and admissible evidence covering all essential ingredients of the offences.
With the no-case submission dismissed, the accused are now required to enter their defence at the next adjourned date. Should they fail to provide a satisfactory explanation or rebuttal, conviction on the charges remains a possibility.