2 min read

Samuel Atta Akyea: Wontumi’s Trial Departed From Normal Court Practices

Lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea questions the trial process of Chairman Wontumi after he was sentenced to 20 years for illegal mining in the Western Region.

Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party known as Chairman Wontumi, is facing a significant legal blow. The Accra High Court recently sentenced him to 20 years in prison for illegal mining activities on the Samreboi concession in the Western Region. This heavy sentence has sparked a debate about how the trial was managed and whether the legal process was followed correctly.

Chairman Wontumi appearing before the Accra High Court

The ruling, delivered by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, didn’t just include prison time. Wontumi was also ordered to pay a fine of 10,000 penalty units, which totals GH¢120,000. If he fails to pay this amount, he faces an additional three years of custodial sentencing.

Lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea speaking about judicial scheduling practices

His lead counsel, Samuel Atta Akyea, has raised concerns about the unusual speed of the proceedings. He argued that “There is a justice delivery system in which judges are not by themselves in a hurry to prosecute people but to adjudicate matters,” and suggested that a review of court records would show that adjournments are typically routine. Atta Akyea noted, “You could do an audit of the adjournment mechanisms in the courts. If you conduct a proper audit, you will see that cases are treated in the normal course of events, and a judge could tell you, ‘I will adjourn this case.’ Some judges even adjourn cases for two months.”

Image for Samuel Atta Akyea: Wontumi’s Trial Departed From Normal Court Practices

The lawyer believes Wontumi’s case was handled as an exception rather than the rule. He questioned the restrictions placed on the defense, stating, “This is a special case. They take it to a special court, and the judge will tell you that you can’t go to another court and do another case while I am waiting. You need to come to this court and then we proceed with the case. What is the meaning of that?”

This challenge to the court’s scheduling highlights a tension between the desire for swift justice and the traditional pacing of the Ghanaian legal system. While the court has made its decision, the arguments from the defense suggest a perceived departure from standard administration. It remains to be seen if these concerns will play a role in any future appeals.

Keep reading