A former General Manager of Akonta Mining has told the High Court in Accra that Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, instructed them to mine in the Tano Nimiri Forest Reserve.
Edward Akwasi Ekuoko, who is testifying as the first Prosecution Witness, said Chairman Wontumi gave the directive despite the lack of requisite mining permits.
Chairman Wontumi, Akonta Mining, Kwame Antwi and Owusu Bempah have been charged together for undertaking illegal mining activities in the Tano Nimiri Forest Reserve in the Western Region.
Akonta Mining, as a company, is also facing charges of felling trees in a Forest Reserve without written authority from the competent forest authority and erecting buildings in a Forest Reserve without written authority from the competent forest authority, contrary to Section 1(1)(a) of the Forest Protection Act, 1974 (NRCD 243), as amended by Section 1 of the Forest Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act 624).
Chairman Wontumi is personally facing two separate counts of abetting the unauthorised felling of trees in a Forest Reserve, contrary to Section 1(1)(a) of the Forest Protection Act, 1974 (NRCD 243), as amended by Section 1 of the Forest Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act 624), and Section 20(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29). They have pleaded not guilty and have been granted bail.
In his Witness Statement, adopted by the High Court on Thursday, April 30, 2026, as his Evidence-in-Chief, Edward Akwasi Ekuoko said while being led by Nana Ama Prempeh, a senior State Attorney for the prosecution that, Chairman Wontumi, the 2nd Accused (A2), instructed them to undertake mining activities in the forest reserve.
“After some months, A2 asked us to move into another area to continue our mining,” Mr Ekuoko told the court.
“That area was in the Aowin District, close to Enchi, in the Western North Region. I can identify the area. It was a forest reserve. It was the Tano Nimiri Forest Reserve, specifically.”
He added, “I knew, by experience, that we required permits and licences to mine in such areas. I asked A2 whether we had that authorisation, since I did not intend to do anything illegal.”
He said “A2 told me to proceed to mine in the said area, as he had spoken with the then Lands and Natural Resources Minister.”
According to the witness, Chairman Wontumi assured him the Minister was aware and that they could mine in the area.
“He told me the Minister was aware, and we could mine in the area. Hesitantly, I spoke with the Chinese partners to move into the area to mine,” he said.
Mr Ekuoko said he later discovered that the “permit” Chairman Wontumi referred to was not a mining licence.
“Later, I found out that the permit A2 said he had to mine in the area was only a letter from the Forestry Commission, in response to a request the sector Minister had made to the Commission for an update on A2’s request for a permit to mine in the forest reserve,” he stated.
“It was a no-objection letter to A2’s request for a permit. It was not a mining permit. We began mining in the reserve, regardless.”
Following the adoption of his witness statement, Counsel for the Accused persons led by Andy APPIAH-Kubi is subjecting the witness to cross examination.
Brief facts
It is the case of the Prosecution that, the 1st Accused Person (A1) is AKONTA MINING COMPANY LIMITED. It is a company incorporated under the laws of Ghana on November 5, 2010, with the object of mining and exploration.
Tarkwa is listed as its principal place of business, however, A1 conducts its mining activities mainly in the Samreboi area.
The Prosecution explained that, Tarkwa and Samreboi are in the Western Region.
It said, the 2nd Accused Person (A2) is BERNARD ANTWI BOASIAKO alias WONTUMI, a 49-year-old entrepreneur, and a native of Kuntanase in the Ashanti Region.
It said, n the records of the Office of the Registrar of Companies, A2 is one of the two shareholder and one of the two directors of A1.
The 3rd Accused Person (A3) is KWAME
ANTWI (at large) and listed as the other shareholder and other director of A1.
But, when asked of the whereabouts of his co-shareholder and co-director, (A3), A1 stated during interrogation that he never saw or heard of him (A3) since year 2010 after they both completed Al’s incorporation and other authorisation formalities. Investigations have, accordingly, established that A2 alone has since exercised absolute control over A1 and its activities.
Further investigation is ongoing to establish the existence (if at all) and identity of A3.
EDWARD AKUAKO, then the 4th Accused has been withdrawn from the case after offering to testify for the prosecution.
The 5th Accused Persons (A5) is KWADWO OWUSU BEMPAH alias SLY. He is, at all material times, Al’s Operations Manager.
He, too, is at large.
A few years ago, the Headquarters of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Police Service received multiple petitions from various individuals and organisations demanding a criminal investigation into the activities of A1 and its controlling owner and director – A2.
The petitions were about the unauthorised mining and mineral rights related activities ofA1 and A2 in the Tano Nimire Forest Reserve.
Tano Nimire Forest
Subsequently, the Police Service launched investigations into Al’s activities within the Forest Reserves.
The investigations reveal that in July 2022, A1 lawfully obtained mining leases over concessions in Samreboi and Abekoase, both in the Western Region.
These concessions were located outside the Tano Nimire Forest Reserve. Later in August 2022, A1 applied for a permit to enter and undertake mining operations in the Tano Nimire Forest Reserve. The application was, however, refused.
Accordingly, A1 did not obtain or have a mineral right to undertake mining operations within the forest reserve. Neither did it acquire lawful authority to enter.
In the same month – August 2022 – a Forest Range Supervisor of the Forestry Commission who was on patrol discovered that not less than six excavators had crossed the Tano River into the Tano Nimire Forest Reserve and were engaged in active mining operations. All the excavators were branded with Al’s corporate logo.
The Forest Range Supervisor promptly reported this to his superior officers. Subsequent investigations established that A1 entered the forest reserve, the refusal of its mining lease application notwithstanding.
Further investigations reveal that A1 had, without a permit, brazenly erected security checkpoints and other structures, and had begun conducting extensive mining operations therein, still without a license.
The structures and check points had Al’s corporate logo marked on them.
A few weeks later, ti was observed that the number of excavators had rapidly increased to more than 40, many boldly bearing A1’s corporatelogo.
To provide housing for the teeming number of persons working for it, A1 put up several makeshift structures across the Forest Reserve.
Investigations reveal that A1 and A2 had no authorisation to erect such structures and buildings in the Forest Reserve.
Al’s mining activities in the forest reserve caused extreme environmental destruction, including the devastation of approximately 13 hectares of land covering the bed and banks of the Tano River and adjoining portions of the
forest reserve.
This destruction involved the uprooting and felling of hundreds of merchantable trees and unquantifiable saplings, the loss of vegetation cover, and severe pollution of the river ecosystem.
On August 17, 2022, officials of the Forestry Commission accompanied by media personnel and officers of Samartex Timber and Plywood Limited visited the site ofA l ‘ s illegal activities within the forestreserve.
Samartex Timber and Plywood Limited held timber harvesting rights as the sole concession holder in the Tano Nimire forest reserve.
The Forestry-Commission-led team arrested some persons believed to be employees of A1 and seized their mining equipment, including water-pumping machines and metal pipes.
Whilst making their way out of the forest reserve, they were confronted by Al’s armed personnel who had blocked the exit, preventing the Forestry-Commission-led team from exiting with the seized mining equipment.
The said armed personnel drove in vehicles which were marked with Al’s corporate logo.
They were led by A4. A5, who was also at the confrontation scene, belligerently demanded the release of the seizedequipment from the Forestry-Commission- led team. Investigations established that Al’s armed personnel released the Forestry-Commission-led team, but only after they had forced them (the Forestry-Commission-led team) to surrender the seized equipment to Al’s armed men.
Based on these facts, three of the Accused Persons were apprehended after several attempts by the security and intelligence agencies, including a confrontation in Kumasi between the armed men accompanying AZ.
