Legal practitioner and activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor has moved to clear up public confusion surrounding a key development in the ongoing trial of Bernard Antwi Boasiako, widely known as Chairman Wontumi. The High Court recently directed the defence to file what is known in legal terms as a “submission of no case”, a procedural step that has sparked questions among many Ghanaians watching the case unfold.
Speaking on social media, Barker-Vormawor acknowledged that many people have been puzzled by the phrase, noting that legal jargon is often “lost in translation” outside the courtroom. He said he was initially surprised by how much misunderstanding there was, but quickly realised that terms commonplace in courtrooms are unfamiliar to most of the public.
At its core, Barker-Vormawor explained, a submission of no case is a formal legal argument made by the defence after the prosecution closes its case. It challenges whether the evidence presented by the state is sufficient to justify continuing the trial. If the prosecution has failed to present enough credible evidence to prove the accused committed an offence beyond reasonable doubt, the defence can ask the court to dismiss the case without the accused having to give testimony.
“In our criminal justice system, the standard of proof required is very high,” Barker-Vormawor said. “The prosecution must convince the court that the accused committed the crime beyond all reasonable doubt. A submission of no case allows the defence to test whether that burden has been met.”
To make the concept more relatable, Barker-Vormawor gave a simple example: if a computer is found in someone’s house but several people live there, that alone does not conclusively prove any one of them committed a crime. In such a situation, he said, it might be reasonable for the defence to argue that the prosecution’s evidence does not sufficiently link the accused to the alleged offence.
He stressed that the right to make a submission of no case is an important safeguard in the criminal justice process. It ensures that trials proceed only when there is a credible factual foundation to support the charges. Barker-Vormawor emphasised that the motion is not an admission of guilt or innocence, but a procedural tool that allows the court to assess whether the state has met its legal obligation in presenting evidence.
Observers have increasingly followed the Wontumi trial, which relates to allegations of illegal mining activities. After the prosecution rested its case, Wontumi’s legal team was instructed to file the submission of no case, setting the stage for this next phase of legal argument. Barker-Vormawor’s explanation comes amidst broader public interest in the case and reflects a desire to help non-lawyers better understand the judicial process.
He noted that understanding these legal mechanisms is crucial for public confidence in the justice system, especially in high-profile matters. Barker-Vormawor expressed hope that his explanation would provide clarity and lessen confusion, encouraging the public to look beyond sensational headlines and appreciate the procedural steps that underpin fair trials.
As the defence prepares its submission, the court will consider whether the evidence presented thus far is legally sufficient to justify moving the case to the next stage. If the judge finds that the prosecution has not established a prima facie case, the charges could be dismissed. However, if the court rules that sufficient evidence exists, the trial will continue, and the defence will then have the opportunity to present its case.
For many Ghanaians trying to follow the Wontumi trial, Barker-Vormawor’s breakdown of “submission of no case” offers a useful lesson in criminal procedure one that highlights how legal standards and protections function in practice, and why the technical language of law can matter greatly to the outcome of a case.