The High Court’s Criminal Court 4 on Thursday sat to continue proceedings in the trial of Ashanti Regional Chairman Bernard Antwi Boasiako, aka Chairman Wontumi, over alleged illegal mining activities linked to a concession at Samreboi.

The prosecution alleges that mining operations were carried out on the Samreboi concession without the required authorisation from the sector minister, in contravention of Ghana’s mining laws.

During proceedings on May 7, 2026, the court moved to fix dates for the defence to open its case.

That process, however, ran into resistance from defence lawyer Andy Appiah-Kubi, who initially rejected the proposed dates and asked for longer adjournments.

The exchanges drew a sharp reaction from the presiding judge, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, who sought to assert the court’s authority over the scheduling of proceedings.

A back-and-forth followed as the court and defence debated available dates.

At one point, a visibly frustrated Justice Kocuvie-Tay questioned the defence’s objections.

“Where’s the rush? You don’t want me to do the case? I have considered all your dates and, in some cases, shifted my sessions to the afternoon to accommodate you. What do you want me to do again?”

The judge also pushed back against public criticism over the pace of Operation Recover All Loot (ORAL) cases, saying lawyers must accept part of the blame for delays.

“When you go and sit on TV and people are insulting the judiciary for the delay in cases, don’t sit there and look at them, tell them you are the one contributing to it.”

“The public continues to criticise us for delays in cases, so we are also sitting up.”

On the prosecution side, Deputy Attorney-General Justice Sai argued that an expeditious trial was also in the accused's interests.

He told the court that the prosecution had already made significant concessions and was prepared to sit for three out of five days each week, opposing the defence's proposal of one sitting per week.

“My Lady, we have accommodated the defence enough; an expeditious trial is even in the accused person’s interest, and we who have much of the burden for the rest of the trial are prepared to conduct our cross-examination according to the court’s schedule.

"Our schedule as prosecution has to be taken into account; the defence cannot dictate the pace of this trial.”

The court adjourned proceedings to May 14, 2026, for a case management conference to continue as the accused prepares to open his defence.