Edward Akuoko, testifying as a prosecution witness, stated plainly: "Since I have known Chairman Wontumi, he doesn't issue or work with documents, and his defence has been that he is not an academic."
This testimony is significant because it comes not from an opponent, but from someone who has had direct knowledge of Wontumi's conduct. It is Wontumi's own consistent position, now placed on record in a court of law.
The statement reveals a pattern. Whenever documentation is expected or required, Wontumi's standing response has been to point to his educational background as the reason he does not engage with written records. This has apparently been his defence not once, but repeatedly over time.
The implication of this is clear. In legal and business settings, documents serve as evidence of decisions, agreements, and accountability.
A person in a position of authority who consistently avoids working with documents creates a situation where his actions and instructions become difficult to trace or verify.
By his own repeated admission, as relayed by the witness, there is no paper trail. No written instructions. No signed records.
This is not merely a personal habit — in the context of a criminal case, it becomes a matter of legal consequence.
The court will now have to weigh what it means when someone in a leadership position over a mining operation operates entirely outside documented processes, and whether "I am not an academic" is a sufficient explanation in matters involving national resources and the law.