Court of Appeal rejects Wontumi’s bid to halt mining trial

Bernard Antwi Boasiako, widely known as Chairman Wontumi, has lost again in his attempt to suspend the criminal trial he is facing at the High Court.

In a unanimous decision, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed the fresh application for a stay of proceedings, ruling that neither Wontumi nor Akonta Mining had shown the kind of exceptional circumstances required to justify halting the case.

The panel was chaired by Justice Georgina Mensah-Datse, with Justices George Buadi and Aryeetey Armah concurring.

The latest application followed an earlier failed effort at the High Court, where Wontumi and his company had sought to stop proceedings after being ordered to open their defence and answer the charges against them.

Still dissatisfied, they returned to the Court of Appeal with what amounted to a second attempt to secure a pause in the trial.

Arguing for the application, defence lawyer Andy Appiah-Kubi said his clients faced the risk of irreversible harm if the proceedings were allowed to continue. He contended that portions of the High Court’s ruling, particularly parts of the judgment he referenced, appeared to suggest that the accused had already committed the offences charged.

According to him, that language was prejudicial and raised concerns about whether his clients could still receive a fair trial. He maintained that the issue was not simply procedural, but touched directly on the constitutional presumption of innocence and broader fair trial rights.

In his submission, he urged the appellate court to recognise those concerns as exceptional circumstances warranting intervention.

The state, however, strongly opposed the request.

Deputy Attorney General Justice Srem-Sai argued that the law is settled on the point that a stay pending appeal is not granted as a matter of course. He said the applicant had to show truly exceptional grounds, such as a jurisdictional defect, a problem with the charge sheet, or a clear constitutional violation of the kind recognised in earlier case law.

Relying in part on principles drawn from the Opuni case, he said none of the grounds advanced by Wontumi’s team met that threshold. In his view, the High Court’s dismissal of a submission of no case did not amount to a denial of the presumption of innocence, nor did it establish unfairness requiring the proceedings to be frozen.

He therefore asked the court to dismiss the repeat application.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the prosecution and held that the applicants had failed to establish any exceptional basis for the relief they were seeking.

The decision means the High Court trial will continue.