Wontumi denies allowing witness to mine on Akonta Mining concession
Testifying in his own defence at the High Court in Accra on Thursday, May 21, 2026, Chairman Wontumi said the arrangement with the witness, Henry Okum, was only for land reclamation and coconut planting.
Chairman Wontumi says the only deal he had with prosecution witness Henry Okum was to restore damaged land and plant coconut trees on Akonta Mining’s concession.
The Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party, whose private name is Bernard Antwi Boasiako, rejected claims at the High Court in Accra that he allowed Mr Okum to undertake mining activities on the concession.
He is standing trial together with Akonta Mining on charges including allegedly assigning mineral rights without ministerial approval.
Under cross-examination by Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai on Thursday, May 21, 2026, Wontumi admitted giving Mr Okum access to the concession.
But he insisted the permission was limited to reclamation.
According to him, Mr Okum was expected to reclaim portions of degraded land and plant coconut trees, with both parties later sharing the benefit when the trees matured.
“He came to reclaim the land and plant coconut trees so that when the coconuts mature, we would share,” he said.
The prosecution, however, suggested that the explanation was a cover for illegal mining.
Dr Srem-Sai put it to Wontumi that Mr Okum was known to be a small-scale miner and was allowed onto the concession for mining, not reclamation.
Wontumi disagreed, saying Mr Okum introduced himself as a “service support miner”.
He also denied helping Mr Okum acquire excavators or other earth-moving machines.
“That is not true. I do not know what work he did. He only planted trees and carried out reclamation. I did not assist him in purchasing any earth-moving equipment,” he said.
The Deputy Attorney-General further suggested that Wontumi’s approach was to obtain mining leases and then allow others to mine on them illegally in return for a share of proceeds, sometimes described as goodwill or percentage.
Wontumi called the claim a “blatant falsehood”.
A major part of the state’s case is based on the testimony of Mr Okum, who earlier told the court that Wontumi had agreed for him to mine parts of the concession and use proceeds from the activity to fund reclamation.
That evidence had already influenced the court’s decision to order Wontumi to open his defence.
In that ruling, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay referred to Wontumi’s own caution statement, in which he admitted allowing Mr Okum onto the concession, but said it was only to plant coconut trees and reclaim mined areas.
The judge also noted Mr Okum’s claim that he received no direct funding from Wontumi for the reclamation work.
According to the court, that raised the question of how Mr Okum was expected to finance the exercise if he was not allowed to mine.
During his testimony, Wontumi admitted there was no written agreement covering the arrangement.
He said the only understanding was that Mr Okum would reclaim the land, plant trees and later share the benefit from the coconuts.
He also told the court he never visited the site after granting Mr Okum access.
According to him, he relied on videos allegedly sent by Mr Okum showing reclamation work and the planting of about 18,000 coconut trees.
Before Wontumi entered the witness box, the defence had called two witnesses: mining expert Wisdom Gomashie and former Deputy Lands Minister George Mireku Duker.
