Copyright ahotoronline
The Minority caucus in parliament is scandalized by the admission of the Municipal Chief Executive of the Birim Central Municipality, Solomon Kusi Brako that illegal miners were fined various sums of money for illegally mining in the Akyem Oda environs and released to continue their illegal activities. This was after some of these illegal miners who described themselves as NDC branch executives, have had cause to complain because the same MCE who took money from them directed the National Anti- illegal mining operations Secretariat to their site to burn them equipment. After newspaper publications which attributed its source to a leaked tape from an NDC platform, the MCE held a press conference and confirmed that it was the Municipal Finance Officer who took the money as legal fines for the illegal activities of the miners and went further to show receipts to that effect. 1. The minority is questioning why the President’s representative in the Birim Central Municipality which is Akyem Oda will defend the imposition of a fine for illegal mining (Galamsay) with all its devastating effects and compromise the President’s supposedly avowed interest in fighting galamsay? 2. Why will this same MCE direct the NAIMOS operations to clamp down on these miners after taking the so-called legal fines from them for their equipment to be destroyed because they were engaged in illegality. 3. Does the MCE possess the prerogative to collect fines? According to the Local Governance Act, 2016 (Act 936), the power to impose and collect fines lies with the courts Section 162 of the Local Governance Act, 2016 (Act 936) outlines the powers of the District Assembly, but it doesn't grant the MCE the authority to collect fines. 4. Section 46 of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) states that any person who contravenes the Act or its regulations commits an offense and is liable to a fine or imprisonment. The court determines the fine or penalty. We in the minority can now say of a fact that the MCE is engaged in ultra vires. When the MCE attempted to show the purported receipt to the cameras during the press conference, some observations were made: Receipt book number: 03729141 Date of payment: September 25, 2025. Payer's name: Vincent Sedjara- Amount: GHc 15,000 Receipt Examination - Each receipt sheet has an original and two duplicates with different colors printing. - Original receipts typically have light blue or green color, while duplicates are pink and Inconsistency- The MCE presented the original receipt still fixed in the booklet during the press conference, instead of the duplicates, which should have been left in the booklet. - This raises suspicions, as standard practice dictates that the original receipt is issued too the Generated with https://kome.ai The MCE's actions and presentation of the original receipt suggest an attempt to cover up the alleged extortion. The fact that the original receipt was still in the booklet, despite allegedly being issued a month prior to the press conference further supports the notion that the MCE is trying to fabricate evidence. It appears that no receipt was actually issued to the payer as emphasized by one of the miners and the MCE's explanation is inconsistent with standard receipt issuance practices. Official documentation from the Assembly also further betrays the MCEs position. The supposed legal payment for the illegal activity was done on 25th of September 2025. The Assembly together with other Assemblies in the Eastern region officially presented its budget for 2026 on 21st October 2025 which showcased its performance in 2025. The revenue for fines for the year 2025 which should have included the contentious legal fines for the illegal mining activity only amounted to 12,813 Ghc whereas the supposed payment amounted to 55,000 Ghc. Why is that the Assembly didn’t account for this payment? Going through the Birim Central Assemblies fees and fines for this year, culprits are expected to pay the approved fees
