'Justice Kocuvie-Tay assumed Supreme Court's role by refusing constitutional referral' – Atta Akyea

Samuel Atta Akyea, lawyer for Chairman Wontumi, has argued that High Court Judge Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay assumed the role of the Supreme Court by refusing the defence's request to refer what he described as a constitutional question for interpretation.

Speaking on NewsFile on Saturday, July 25, 2026, Atta Akyea contended that the trial judge erred by determining that the constitutional issues raised by the defence were clear and did not require interpretation by the Supreme Court.

"It is important to come to terms with the fact that a High Court should never graduate into the Supreme Court when there are constitutional interpretations born out by the trial," he said.

According to Atta Akyea, the defence had argued that rival interpretations had been placed on Article 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution in relation to provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act, making it necessary for the matter to be referred to the Supreme Court.

He maintained that Justice Kocuvie-Tay relied on authorities which, in his view, supported the need for such a referral rather than rejecting it.

Citing the Ex Parte Ezanator decision, Atta Akyea argued that lower courts should not readily assume constitutional provisions are plain and unambiguous where competing interpretations have been advanced.

"The Attorney General says it is plain on the face of it. I beg to submit that rival meanings have been placed on Article 19(11) vis-à-vis the Minerals Act, and therefore, the judge should have left the matter to the only forum that is preserved to interpret the Constitution," he stated.

Wontumi will have comfortable feeding experience in prison, grant increased to GH₵5 - Anthony

Atta Akyea further indicated that the judge's refusal to make the referral would form one of the grounds of appeal.

"For my part, this is a ground of appeal that the judge usurped the interpretation powers of the Supreme Court, and to that extent became the Supreme Court and interpreted matters that the Supreme Court is supposed to interpret," he argued.

He maintained that once rival constitutional interpretations arise, the High Court should not determine the issue itself but refer it to the apex court.

Chairman Wontumi was recently convicted and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment over offences related to illegal mining.

During the trial, the defence challenged aspects of the charges, arguing that they raised constitutional questions concerning the interpretation of Article 19(11) of the Constitution and the applicable provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act.

However, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay dismissed the request for a referral to the Supreme Court and proceeded with the case.

Watch the video below

According to Chariman Wontumi's Lawyer, Samuel Atta Akyea, Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay accorded herself the role of a Supreme Court judge by not allowing them to seek interpretation on a constitutional matter. #Newsfile pic.twitter.com/nkaFG08Rez

— JoyNews (@JoyNewsOnTV) July 25, 2026

MRA/EB

Ghana's recovery due to superior economic management - Ato Forson