BY Daniel Bampoe
The ongoing corruption trial involving former Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining (IMCIM) Secretary, Charles Cromwell Nanabanyin Onuawonto BissueCharles Cromwell Nanabanyin Onuawonto Bissue, and two others took a significant turn on Tuesday after the High Court struck out portions of the prosecution’s first witness statement, ruling that parts of the evidence amounted to hearsay.
The decision came as the Criminal Division of the High Court resumed hearing in the case involving Bissue, Raphael Mensah, and Dr. Naa Dedei Tagoe, who are standing trial over allegations of corruption and the unlawful facilitation of mining concessions.
The ruling marks a notable procedural victory for the defence in a case that has become one of the most closely watched corruption prosecutions being pursued by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).
Defence Withdraws Applications Against In-Camera Proceedings
At the commencement of proceedings, the court had been expected to hear two applications filed by lawyers for the third accused person, Dr. Naa Dedei Tagoe. The applications sought a stay of proceedings and an order to arrest the court’s earlier ruling permitting the first prosecution witness to testify in camera.
However, counsel for Dr. Tagoe informed the court that the defence had decided to discontinue both applications. Following the request, the court struck out the applications as withdrawn, effectively paving the way for the trial to proceed under the existing arrangements governing the testimony of the prosecution’s first witness.
The withdrawal of the applications comes months after legal battles over the court’s decision to allow portions of the trial to be conducted behind closed doors due to concerns raised by the prosecution regarding the safety and security of its witness.
Court Upholds Defence Objection
The more significant development emerged from an objection earlier raised by lawyers for the accused persons regarding portions of the witness statement filed by the prosecution’s first witness.
The defence challenged several paragraphs that referenced interactions between the witness and Andy Thomas Owusu, a businessman who was previously prosecuted by the OSP in connection with the same broader corruption investigation.
According to the defence, those portions of the statement constituted hearsay evidence because Owusu is neither an accused person nor a witness in the current proceedings. The lawyers argued that allowing such evidence would unfairly prejudice the accused persons and violate established rules governing admissibility of evidence.
OSP Fights To Retain Evidence
The Office of the Special Prosecutor strongly opposed the objection, insisting that the disputed portions were relevant to the prosecution’s case.
State prosecutors argued that the interactions involving Andy Thomas Owusu had already been judicially established in earlier proceedings that culminated in his conviction.
They further contended that the evidence was not hearsay because the prosecution intended to introduce contemporaneous video recordings of the interactions, making the evidence direct and verifiable.
The prosecution maintained that the challenged paragraphs formed part of a broader factual narrative necessary to establish the circumstances surrounding the alleged corruption scheme.
Court Rules Against Prosecution
In a ruling delivered on June 9, 2026, the court sided with the defence and struck out the portions of the witness statement that referred to Andy Thomas Owusu.
The ruling means that the prosecution’s first witness will not be permitted to rely on those specific sections when giving evidence in the current trial.
While the court did not dismiss the prosecution’s case, the decision narrows the scope of evidence available to the OSP as it seeks to prove its allegations against the accused persons.
Background
The prosecution of Charles Bissue traces its origins to the 2019 Galamsey Fraud undercover investigation conducted by Tiger Eye P.I., which alleged corruption within Ghana’s anti-illegal mining task force.
Following years of investigations, legal challenges, and court battles, the OSP initiated criminal proceedings against Bissue and others over allegations that they received bribes and illicit gifts to facilitate the issuance of mining concession stickers and approvals to entities that did not qualify under established procedures.
The current case emerged after Andy Thomas Owusu entered into legal proceedings with the OSP and was subsequently convicted. Following his conviction, prosecutors say fresh evidence was uncovered, prompting the filing of a new set of charges against Bissue, Raphael Mensah, and Dr. Naa Dedei Tagoe.
Because Owusu had already been convicted in the earlier proceedings, he was not included among the accused persons in the fresh case before the High Court.
Trial Continues
Despite the setback for the prosecution, the substantive trial remains active, with the court expected to continue hearing evidence from the prosecution’s first witness.
The matter has been adjourned to Thursday, June 11, 2026, for the continuation of proceedings as the OSP seeks to establish its case against the three accused persons in one of the most prominent corruption trials linked to the fight against illegal mining.
