The Minerals Commission has defended its decision to terminate the mineral rights of Northern Ashanti Mines Limited, formerly Owere Mines, insisting that the company persistently failed to meet its statutory financial obligations despite several opportunities to settle its debts.
According to the Commission, the company accumulated approximately US$8.33 million in unpaid Annual Mineral Right (AMR) fees on its mining leases as of April 2025, alongside US$49,928 owed on prospecting licences.
Addressing a press conference, the Commission rejected allegations by Northern Ashanti Mines that the termination was carried out in bad faith, maintaining that the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources acted within his legal authority.
The Commission explained that Owere Mines acquired a mining lease covering 595 cadastral blocks in January 2010 but subsequently failed to fulfil its annual payment obligations under Section 24 of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703).
It disclosed that the company had accumulated more than US$4 million in outstanding fees by May 2020, prompting the issuance of a notice to remedy the breach.
Following the takeover of the company by BCM Investments, management proposed settling the debt in four instalments. However, the Commission said the company failed to honour the arrangement despite being given additional opportunities.
By October 2022, the outstanding debt had risen to US$5.59 million, increasing to US$6.18 million by December of the same year.
The Commission indicated that further notices issued in April 2025 revealed that the company’s indebtedness had reached US$8.33 million in mining lease fees, excluding outstanding prospecting licence fees.
Consequently, on April 7, 2026, the Commission recommended the termination of the company’s mineral rights to the Lands Minister, citing persistent non-payment.
The Minister subsequently approved the issuance of the termination notice.
Responding to the company’s challenge to the debt figures, the Commission insisted that its records showed Northern Ashanti Mines had paid only US$300,000 in two instalments, contrary to the company’s claim of having paid US$1 million.
“For a company that claims to have spent US$200,000,000 on the mine, what prevented it from paying the US$8,000,000 owed to the people of Ghana?” the Commission questioned.
It further criticised the company’s decision to pursue legal action against the Lands Minister, the Minerals Commission and the Attorney-General while simultaneously seeking public dialogue over the matter.
The Commission maintained that the company should allow the courts to determine the dispute rather than engage in what it described as litigation through the media.
It stressed that the termination of the mineral rights meant the affected concessions had reverted to the State, without cancelling the company’s outstanding financial liabilities.
The Commission consequently announced its intention to pursue the recovery of all outstanding payments owed by Northern Ashanti Mines.
It also emphasised the State’s responsibility to protect the affected mining assets from encroachment and other illegal activities, citing Section 70 of Act 703.
The Commission reaffirmed that due process had been followed throughout the termination proceedings and insisted that no mining company, whether locally or foreign-owned, would be permitted to disregard its statutory obligations.
“No one is above the law in this country. If you flout the laws, there are sanctions, and those sanctions will apply,” the Commission stated.
It reiterated its commitment to enforcing Ghana’s mining laws without fear or favour, stressing that the country’s mineral resources belong to the people and must be managed in accordance with the law.
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.
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.
Source link
