Legal scholar Professor Kwaku Asare, popularly known as Kwaku Azar, has dismissed suggestions that the absence of documentary evidence weakens the Attorney General’s case in alleged illegal mining matters.

Responding to comments attributed to social commentator Asokwa Kwaku, the professor said he had not independently verified the claims but would consider them hypothetically for legal analysis.

“I will graciously accept them for purposes of discussion,” he stated in a Facebook post on December 8, 2025.

A missing docket is justice stolen – Kwaku Azar on Akonta mining case

Kwaku Azar argued that the lack of documents does not automatically exonerate any suspect.

“People running illegal operations don’t draft leases, file agreements, or sign letters of authorisation. Criminals don’t leave paper trails for their own arrest. So, the absence of a document is expected. It is not exonerating,” he indicated.

He added that illegal mining is typically conducted informally.

“Nobody writes a memo: ‘I hereby grant you this land for illegal mining.’ The lack of paperwork proves nothing, except that the actors were careful,” he said.

Kwaku Azar also corrected misconceptions about oral evidence, stating that not all verbal accounts amount to hearsay.

“If a witness says, ‘X personally instructed me,’ or ‘I saw X allocate the land,’ or ‘X led us to the site,’ that’s direct evidence, not hearsay. According to him, ‘One credible witness plus corroboration equals a viable prosecution,” he explained.

Those who concealed Akonta Mining docket are equally guilty – Professor Azar

He emphasised that circumstantial evidence can be just as compelling as direct testimony.

“Courts convict every day based on control of the land, benefit received, instructions given, presence at the site, and machinery deployed under someone’s authority,” he noted, stressing that documents are not the only way to prove a fact.

Professor Kwaku Azar underscored that the law requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, not written agreements.

“The standard is proof beyond reasonable doubt, not ‘produce a letter.’ Testimony, conduct, and corroborating facts can easily meet that burden,” he noted.

He further observed that galamsey dealings are rarely documented.

“These deals are secret, oral, off-the-record, and deliberately untraceable. If prosecutions required signed agreements, no galamsey case would ever succeed,” he argued.

He stressed that his remarks were purely hypothetical and not a commentary on any ongoing case.

Read the full post below:



MRA/MA

Former President Kufuor shares how he became a Catholic and a Freemason