The Accra High Court has granted a 30-day extension for the prosecution and defence to conclude plea bargain negotiations in the high-profile GH¢30 million alleged fraud case involving Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP). The ruling, delivered on Monday, July 27, by Justice Halima El-Alawa Abdul Baasit, comes as the case takes a new turn with the appointment of a high-profile legal team and the backdrop of Wontumi’s recent conviction in a separate illegal mining case.
New Legal Representation
When the case was called on Monday, Samuel Atta Akyea, a former Minister of Works and Housing and a seasoned lawyer, formally announced his appearance as lead counsel for Chairman Wontumi, taking over from Andy Appiah-Kubi. Atta Akyea’s entry into the case signals a significant reinforcement of the defence team, as he brings decades of legal experience and a deep understanding of criminal litigation. His appointment is seen as a strategic move to navigate the complex legal terrain of the plea bargain process while managing the political sensitivities surrounding the case.
The Plea Bargain Process: An Update
Atta Akyea informed the court that after discussions with the Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, he was confident that the parties could reach a reasonable agreement through plea bargaining. “I have conferred with the Deputy Attorney-General and I humbly hold the view that we can do a reasonable plea bargaining in his chambers. In the circumstances, I pray the court to enlarge time to enable us to undertake that exercise,” he submitted.
The defence counsel initially requested an adjournment until October to allow sufficient time for the negotiations, citing the complexity of the case and the need for thorough discussions. However, the prosecution proposed a shorter timeline.
Prosecution’s Response and the Stalled Negotiations
Dr. Srem-Sai, responding on behalf of the prosecution, agreed that additional time was necessary but proposed a 30-day adjournment instead of the approximately 90 days requested by the defence. He explained that under Section 162(c)(5) of the relevant law, plea bargaining may proceed concurrently with trial proceedings. However, the prosecution was prepared to waive that right because the discussions were almost complete before they were interrupted.
“We have received an offer and we have made a counter-offer which we were supposed to conclude last week before the accused person’s conviction in another matter derailed the negotiations,” Dr. Srem-Sai told the court. He explained that the conviction prevented the prosecution from meeting the accused person and his counsel to finalise the discussions.
The Deputy Attorney-General further stated that the prosecution had not yet filed its disclosures, and delaying that process would prevent the disclosures from prejudicing the plea negotiations. “We believe that the new counsel will pick up from where we left off with the previous counsel,” he added.
Defence’s Counter-Argument
Atta Akyea agreed with the prosecution’s reasoning but urged the court to grant a longer adjournment to ensure the parties had adequate time to conclude the negotiations. “The reasoning of the honourable Deputy Attorney-General is sound and I am in agreement with him, save to say that we are pleading with you that we come back in term time (October) and that the charges have been withdrawn and we have come to terms. Two months from now should be favourable,” he said.
The defence counsel’s request for a longer timeline reflects the complexity of the case and the desire to secure a favourable outcome for his client, who is already serving a 20-year prison sentence in a separate matter.
Court’s Ruling
Justice Halima El-Alawa Abdul Baasit, after hearing both sides, ruled that the law envisages plea bargaining proceeding alongside trial proceedings and indicated that the court would continue to be guided by the relevant statutory provisions. She subsequently adjourned the case to August 27, 2026, for further directions, giving the parties exactly 30 days to conclude their negotiations.
The judge noted that the timeline was sufficient given that both sides had already made substantial progress before the disruption caused by Wontumi’s conviction in the illegal mining case.
Background: The EXIM Bank Allegations
Chairman Wontumi, who is now a serving convict, and two others are standing trial over an alleged GH¢30 million transaction involving the Ghana Export-Import (EXIM) Bank. The prosecution alleges that Wontumi fraudulently acquired a GH¢14 million facility from the bank, which, with accrued interest over several years, has ballooned to approximately GH¢30 million. The charges include conspiracy to defraud, fraud, and money laundering, all of which are being vigorously contested by the defence.
The case has attracted significant public and political attention, not only because of the amount involved but also due to Wontumi’s prominent role within the NPP. The party’s leadership, including former National Chairman Freddie Blay, Director of Communications Richard Ahiagbah, and several Members of Parliament, have been present at previous hearings, underscoring the political stakes involved.
The Separate Conviction: A Complicating Factor
Wontumi was last week convicted and sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment in a separate case involving illegal mining, commonly known as galamsey, at Samreboi in the Western Region. That conviction, handed down by a different court, marked one of the most severe penalties ever imposed on a high-ranking political official in Ghana’s fight against environmental degradation.
The timing of the conviction—just as plea negotiations in the EXIM Bank case were nearing completion—derailed the discussions, as the prosecution was unable to meet with the accused person and his counsel. This disruption necessitated the appointment of new counsel and the resumption of negotiations from where they had left off.
Legal Implications of Plea Bargaining
Plea bargaining is a legal mechanism that allows a defendant to plead guilty to lesser charges or negotiate a reduced sentence in exchange for cooperation or an admission of guilt. In Ghana, the process is governed by the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), as amended. If the negotiations succeed, the parties will submit a proposed plea agreement to the court for approval. If approved, the case will be resolved without a full trial, saving judicial time and resources.
If no agreement is reached, the case will proceed to a full trial, where the prosecution will present its evidence and the defence will have the opportunity to challenge the allegations. Given the high-profile nature of the case and the political implications, both sides are under significant pressure to reach a resolution.
Public and Political Reactions
The extension of the plea bargain timeline has drawn mixed reactions. Supporters of Wontumi have expressed optimism that the new legal team will secure a favourable outcome, while critics have questioned whether the plea bargain process is being used to shield a political figure from accountability.
Civil society organisations, including the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, have called for transparency in the plea bargain process, urging the court to reject any deal that appears lenient or lacks public accountability. Meanwhile, the NPP leadership has refrained from making public comments, preferring to allow the legal process to unfold without political interference.
Next Steps
The parties now have until August 27, 2026, to conclude their negotiations. If an agreement is reached, the court will review its terms and either accept, reject, or modify it. If no deal is struck, the court will set a trial date, potentially bringing the matter to a full evidentiary hearing by late 2026.
For now, the case remains in a delicate phase, with the outcome of the plea negotiations likely to shape not only Wontumi’s legal fate but also the broader political landscape ahead of the December 2026 general elections. As the clock ticks down to August 27, all eyes will be on the chambers of the Deputy Attorney-General, where the fate of one of Ghana’s most controversial political figures may finally be decided.
