A defence witness in a high-profile mining case stated that verbal agreements for mining rights lack legal validity in Ghana. Wisdom Edem Gomashie, an expert mining engineer testifying for Chairman Wontumi and co-accused, told the court that Ghana’s mining laws require formal written procedures. These steps are necessary before mineral rights can be legally transferred or assigned. Gomashie’s testimony on May 14, 2026, directly contradicted the prosecution’s stance.
Gomashie explained that Ghana’s Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), and related regulations mandate formal processes. He reviewed the charge sheet and concluded that verbal discussions cannot create a valid assignment of mineral rights. He stated that such assignments are formal legal transactions. Therefore, they cannot be formed through informal talks or without written proof. Any transfer must meet specific legal requirements. These include authorization from the sector minister.
The case involves Chairman Wontumi and his company. They face six charges. These relate to allegations of permitting mining on their concession without ministerial approval. They are also accused of facilitating unlicensed mining. The accused have pleaded not guilty. They are currently out on bail. The defence team argues that Chairman Wontumi’s decisions were not assignments of mineral rights. This is because no written agreement existed. The prosecution, however, believes a transfer occurs when a rights holder allows another to mine. This is true even without a written contract.
During cross-examination by Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, the witness's interpretation of the law was challenged. Srem-Sai suggested the expert opinion was not well-founded legally. Gomashie stood by his position. He maintained it aligns with legal requirements for mining licenses. He also noted that leaseholders often use service providers. Their arrangements do not automatically transfer mineral rights.
Earlier, Gomashie identified his witness statement. However, inconsistencies arose under further questioning. Dr. Srem-Sai pointed out discrepancies in his academic qualifications. Gomashie stated he was born in April 1993. However, his statement claimed he earned his first degree in 1998. His statement also suggested a Master’s degree from KNUST. He later corrected this to the University of Mines and Technology and the University of Ghana. Gomashie admitted these were mistakes and typographical errors. He conceded his statement about obtaining an MSc in Minerals and Economics in 2003 was also a typo. The court permitted him to correct these errors.
This trial highlights the critical importance of proper documentation in Ghana’s mining sector. The Minerals and Mining Act is the primary law governing these activities. Strict adherence to its provisions is essential for legal compliance. The outcome of this case could set precedents for how such agreements are viewed in court. It will also impact how mining rights are managed and enforced across the country. The precise value of the concessions or potential lost revenue related to the alleged illegal mining was not detailed.