According to a report published by the Daily Graphic on May 15, 2026, the incident occurred at the High Court during hearings held on Thursday, May 14, 2026, where the first defence witness appeared on behalf of Chairman Wontumi and his company.
The witness reportedly informed the court that certain sections of the statement submitted in his name did not accurately reflect his views or the information he intended to provide.
During questioning by lawyers for the prosecution, he openly rejected responsibility for parts of the document and stated that those words were not his.
“Some parts of the witness statement are not mine,” the witness reportedly indicated while under cross-examination.
The case centers on allegations that Chairman Wontumi and his company permitted two individuals to carry out mining operations on their concession without obtaining the legally required licence, an act prosecutors say violates Ghana’s mining regulations.
Chairman Wontumi and the company have denied the allegations and continue to maintain their innocence before the court.
The witness’s unexpected admission quickly became one of the most talked-about moments of the hearing, as prosecution lawyers carefully examined inconsistencies between his oral testimony and the written statement submitted to the court.
According to courtroom accounts, the witness attempted to distinguish between portions of the statement he accepted and those he claimed were either inaccurately recorded or inserted without his approval. He reportedly insisted several disputed sections “were not his words.”
Legal observers say witness statements are an important component of court proceedings because they form part of the official evidence considered during trial.
“Some parts of the witness statement are not mine,” the witness reportedly indicated while under cross-examination.
The case centers on allegations that Chairman Wontumi and his company permitted two individuals to carry out mining operations on their concession without obtaining the legally required licence, an act prosecutors say violates Ghana’s mining regulations.
Chairman Wontumi and the company have denied the allegations and continue to maintain their innocence before the court.
The witness’s unexpected admission quickly became one of the most talked-about moments of the hearing, as prosecution lawyers carefully examined inconsistencies between his oral testimony and the written statement submitted to the court.
According to courtroom accounts, the witness attempted to distinguish between portions of the statement he accepted and those he claimed were either inaccurately recorded or inserted without his approval. He reportedly insisted several disputed sections “were not his words.”
Legal observers say witness statements are an important component of court proceedings because they form part of the official evidence considered during trial.
When a witness disowns portions of such a document, questions may arise regarding the credibility, reliability, and preparation of the evidence being presented.
Some analysts believe the development could affect the strength of the defence’s case if the court concludes that parts of the witness statement are unreliable or inconsistent.
Some analysts believe the development could affect the strength of the defence’s case if the court concludes that parts of the witness statement are unreliable or inconsistent.
Others caution that the full legal impact will depend on how the court ultimately interprets the testimony and surrounding circumstances.
The presiding judge reportedly acknowledged the witness’s position while allowing the cross-examination to continue. However, the issue is expected to receive further scrutiny as the trial progresses.
Given Chairman Wontumi’s prominence within Ghanaian politics and the seriousness of the allegations involved, the case continues to attract widespread national attention from political observers, legal analysts, and members of the public.
Meanwhile, discussions surrounding the trial have intensified on social media, where many Ghanaians continue to debate the implications of the witness’s comments and what they could mean for the broader case moving forward.
The presiding judge reportedly acknowledged the witness’s position while allowing the cross-examination to continue. However, the issue is expected to receive further scrutiny as the trial progresses.
Given Chairman Wontumi’s prominence within Ghanaian politics and the seriousness of the allegations involved, the case continues to attract widespread national attention from political observers, legal analysts, and members of the public.
Meanwhile, discussions surrounding the trial have intensified on social media, where many Ghanaians continue to debate the implications of the witness’s comments and what they could mean for the broader case moving forward.