Wontumi Appeals High Court Judgment on Samreboi Mining Case

• Chairman Wontumi has appealed his conviction in the Samreboi illegal mining case.
• The appeal was jointly filed by Mr. Boasiako and Akonta Mining Company Limited on July 28, 2026.
• The appellants argue that the trial judge exceeded their jurisdiction and failed to properly interpret the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703).
• The outcome of this case may have significant implications for the interpretation of constitutional provisions and statutory law in Ghana.

The learned trial Judge usurped the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in flagrant contravention of Article 130(1)(a) and (2) of the Constitution 1992 in interpreting Article 19(11) of the Constitution set against sections 14(1), 59, 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended by Section 3 of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2019 (Act 995), as clear, when both parties have rival meanings on the words 'unless the offence is defined … in a written law'.

Chairman Wontumi, also known as Bernard Antwi Boasiako, has taken his case to the Court of Appeal after being convicted in the Samreboi illegal mining case. The appeal was jointly filed by Mr. Boasiako and Akonta Mining Company Limited, which is associated with the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP). This move comes after the Accra High Court (Criminal Division 4) delivered a judgment on July 20, 2026, imposing sanctions against the accused parties. The case drew significant public attention due to allegations of illegal mining activities linked to Akonta Mining Company Limited.

The appeal is centered around several key issues, including the interpretation of constitutional provisions and statutory law. Specifically, the appellants argue that the trial judge exceeded their jurisdiction by interpreting Article 19(11) of the Constitution in relation to sections 14(1), 59, and 99(2)(b) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703). They contend that this interpretation is a usurpation of the Supreme Court's authority. Furthermore, they argue that the trial judge failed to properly interpret the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), as amended.

The grounds of appeal filed by Chairman Wontumi and Akonta Mining Company Limited highlight potential weaknesses in the High Court's judgment. Lawyers representing the appellants should review these grounds to assess the likelihood of success in the appeal. The outcome of this case may have significant implications for the interpretation of constitutional provisions and statutory law in Ghana, particularly with regards to the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703).

Lawyers representing Chairman Wontumi should review the grounds of appeal to assess potential weaknesses in the High Court's judgment, particularly regarding the interpretation of constitutional provisions and statutory law.

Source: Original reporting via Abubakar Ibrahim