Wontumi Challenges Prosecution’s Case with No Case to Answer Motion

Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, has filed a submission of no case to answer at the High Court after the prosecution closed its case in the ongoing criminal proceedings.

The motion was filed on Tuesday at the High Court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, following the state’s decision to close its case after calling four witnesses.

Counsel for the accused, Andy Appiah-Kubi, informed the court that the application had been filed earlier in the morning of the hearing.

“This morning we have filed our submission of no case at the registry of this court, albeit quite recent. I have a copy for the court,” Appiah-Kubi told the judge.

A submission of no case to answer is typically filed by the defence when it believes the prosecution has failed to establish sufficient evidence requiring the accused to open a defence.

However, the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, raised concerns about the timing and volume of the application.

“We have been given very voluminous documents a few minutes ago with the title submission of no case to answer. Naturally, a submission of no case should be a very simple submission since the claim is that there is no merit in the prosecution’s case,” Dr Srem-Sai said.

He argued that the length of the document suggested the defence itself may have struggled to justify the application.

“With the volume means that the defence struggles to make a submission of no case. We pray for a short adjournment to review and, if necessary, respond to the submission, and we believe that there is a very strong case for the accused persons to answer,” he added.

The court acknowledged the arguments from both sides, noting that the submission had only just been filed and that the official copy was yet to be received by the bench.

Justice Kocuvie-Tay observed that the prosecution had also indicated its intention to file a written response to assist the court in determining the application.

In light of the developments, the court adjourned the matter for a status hearing.
The case has been adjourned to March 10, 2026, at 9:00 a.m.