A private legal practitioner and Executive Director for the Centre for Legitimacy and Rule of Law, Richard Nii Armah, has stated that several possibilities could arise following the 20-year jail term handed to Bernard Antwi Boasiako, also known as Chairman Wontumi, over illegal mining activities.
He said there is currently a pending matter before the Supreme Court, where Wontumi’s lawyers asked the High Court to refer provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act used in prosecuting their client to the apex court for interpretation.
He noted that because the presiding High Court judge failed to exercise restraint and wait for the constitutional interpretation to be dealt with by the apex court, a scenario could arise where the Supreme Court vacates the sentence handed to Wontumi.
Lawyers for the Ashanti Regional New Patriotic Party (NPP) Chairman, Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, asked the High Court to refer provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act used to prosecute their client to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
In his written address, Samuel Atta Akyea told the trial court that should the case not be referred to the Supreme Court, Chairman Wontumi ought to be acquitted on the charges filed by the Attorney-General.
Wontumi had pleaded not guilty to the charges at the Criminal Division of the High Court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay.
Counsel for Wontumi wants the Supreme Court to determine whether, on a true and proper interpretation of Article 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution, Section 14(1) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), one of the provisions underpinning the charges against his client, is legally vague, overbroad, and inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the said article, and therefore unconstitutional, null, and void.
He also wants a determination on whether, on the same constitutional test, Section 99(2)(b) of Act 703, as amended by Section 3 of the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 995), which likewise forms the basis of some of the charges, is legally overbroad and inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Article 19(11), and therefore unconstitutional, null, and void.
He further wants a ruling on whether the charges in counts four and six against A1 and A3, which were founded solely on Section 99(2)(b) of Act 703 as amended, are themselves inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Article 19(11), and therefore unconstitutional, null, and void.
However, the High Court went ahead with pronouncing Wontumi, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the NPP, guilty and sentenced him to 20 years in prison.
Reacting to this, Richard Nii Armah indicated that Wontumi has the option to appeal, but was quick to add that because the constitutional interpretation had not been dealt with, it leaves room for possibilities, including the vacation of the sentence.
Speaking in an interview on Nyankonton Mu Nsem on Rainbow Radio 87.5FM, he stated, “As we speak, lawyer Atta Akyea has filed an interpretation matter before the Supreme Court which is yet to be determined. The High Court judge who delivered the sentencing today did not exercise patience in waiting for the apex court to determine the constitutional interpretation matter.
So I can state that if there is indeed an interpretation matter to be determined and it goes in favour of Wontumi, it could potentially make the court vacate the 20-year sentence by the High Court. That could happen because the presiding judge failed in exercising restraint,” he noted.
On the grounds for appeal, he said Wontumi will have two options available to him.
He explained that Wontumi has a chance to appeal the case and provide grounds where he can state that he was not guilty of any of the offences, and so the verdict pronounced should be vacated.
“However, before exercising this option, the records should show that he is indeed not guilty. The other option could be to admit guilt but pray the court to reduce the number of years, as the sentence may be seen as extreme or excessive.”
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
