Officials could face abetment liability for allowing unlicensed mining – Prof Appiagyei-Atua on GoldBod CEO’s comment
Officials who direct that unlicensed mining be allowed could face liability for abetting a criminal offence, Professor Appiagyei-Atua has warned.
The Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University of Ghana School of Law raised the concern in an opinion article responding to comments attributed to the Chief Executive Officer of GoldBod.
The CEO had suggested that miners operating outside certain restricted locations should be allowed to work while their activities are regularised.
“Once it’s not a water body; it’s not a forest reserve or… place like a roadside, whether the person has a licence or not; the government says we should allow the person to mine and register and regularise them,” the CEO said.
Prof Appiagyei-Atua argued that such a direction would conflict with Ghana’s mining laws. He cited sections 9 and 82 of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), which require mineral rights and licences before mining can take place.
“Mining without that licence is not merely irregular; it is a crime.”
He said an official who directs that unlicensed mining be permitted could be liable as an abettor under section 20 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).
He also raised possible liability under provisions concerning the unlawful facilitation of small-scale mining.
His article also questioned whether such directions are compatible with constitutional obligations governing public discretion and environmental protection.
According to the professor, the minister’s authority to issue licences does not include the power to permit mining without them.
“The Minister's statutory power under section 82 is a power to grant licences. It is not a power to authorise mining without one.”
He rejected the suggestion that avoiding rivers, forest reserves and roadsides would make an otherwise unlicensed operation lawful.
“The statement's implicit test — anywhere that is not expressly prohibited is permitted — reverses the statutory scheme, which is a permission-based regime: nothing is permitted unless affirmatively licensed.”
Prof Appiagyei-Atua stressed that formalising artisanal and small-scale mining was a legitimate policy objective. He identified designated mining areas, faster licensing processes and district-level support as lawful options.
His objection, he said, concerned allowing mining before the required authorisation.
“The illegality lies entirely in the sequence. The law permits registration first, then mining. The statement describes mining first, then registering.”
He argued that subsequent registration could not erase an offence already committed. He also warned that miners could not rely on an official assurance as a defence.
The professor urged citizens to challenge unlawful mining through legal means.
“We must take all legal action to resist galamsey.”
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Tags:
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.