Minority Caucus Backs Wontumi’s Appeal, Labels Conviction a “Miscarriage of Justice”
Parliament’s Minority Caucus rallies behind NPP Ashanti Regional Chairman Bernard Antwi-Boasiako
- The Minority Caucus claims Chairman Wontumi’s conviction was built on assumptions and inferences rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt.
- The caucus highlights that while Wontumi's lawful ownership of the mining concession was undisputed
- The caucus confirmed that legal proceedings to overturn the High Court's ruling in the Court of Appeal are already underway
The Minority Caucus in Parliament has officially thrown its weight behind the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Bernard Antwi-Boasiako—popularly known as Chairman Wontumi—as he appeals his recent High Court conviction.
Describing the ruling as a “miscarriage of justice,” the caucus argues that the court’s decision was fundamentally flawed and lacked sufficient evidentiary backing.
Challenging the Court’s Decision
In a statement issued by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the caucus reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law while emphasizing that respecting the judiciary does not preclude challenging flawed rulings.
“While we respect the authority of our courts, respect for the judiciary does not require silence in the face of a judgment that is fundamentally flawed,” the statement read. “Our Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to disagree with judicial decisions and to seek redress through the appellate process. That is precisely what we intend to do.”
A Flawed Evidentiary Basis
Central to the Minority’s argument is the claim that the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The caucus pointed out that Chairman Wontumi’s lawful acquisition of his mineral concession was never in dispute during the trial. Instead, the central legal issue was whether he had illegally assigned or transferred those mineral rights—a charge the Minority asserts was completely unsupported by evidence.
Key arguments raised by the caucus include:
-
No Direct Evidence: The prosecution failed to present concrete evidence showing that Wontumi assigned or transferred his mineral rights in violation of the law.
-
Reliance on Inferences: The conviction was built on assumptions and inferences rather than solid proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
Lawful Acquisition: Wontumi’s initial ownership of the concession remains unquestioned and legally sound.
Appeal Legal Process Underway
Calling the ruling a “travesty of justice,” the caucus expressed full confidence that the Court of Appeal will overturn the High Court’s decision.
Legal proceedings to challenge the conviction have already begun, and the Minority Caucus reiterated its unwavering support for Chairman Wontumi throughout the appeal process.
