Cassius Mining sues Ghana at London Court for $277M over alleged unlawful contract termination. NORPRA exposed ex-convict directors, prompting license rejection in 2020
Ghana now has a case to settle with Cassius Mining Limited at the London Court of International Arbitration after the country was sued by the Australian miner for what they describe as unlawful termination of contract.
Cassius Mining is demanding US$277 million in compensation from Ghana for what they say was an unlawful breach of contract that led to the company losing millions of dollars in investment.
The Backstory
The Minerals Commission in January 2020 rejected the request by Cassius Mining to extend its minerals prospecting licence (PL) in Gbane in the Talensi District of the Upper East Region. The Minerals Commission in its justification to the company indicated that it earlier failed to undertake a Beneficial Ownership Disclosure when registering the company. This, the Commission says was in contravention of Regulation 107 (1) of the Minerals and Mining (Licensing) Regulation, 2021, (L.I 2176).
According to the authorities, the company breached the mining regulations through its failure to fully disclose that two of the directors are ex-convicts in Australia who have been sentenced for various crimes. The Commission maintained that per the company’s act and the mining regulations, ex-convicts cannot act as directors and shareholders in a company registered in Ghana to conduct business including mining.
A letter cited by The High Street Journal dated 23rd January 2020 told the Managing Director of Cassius Mining that the sector minister has rejected their request for an extension of their prospecting licence.
“We regret to inform you that the Hon. Minister responsible for Mines has considered your request but is unable to approve it,” parts of the letter read. The document further justified, “You concealed and or suppresed the fact that Messrs. Anthony Upul Samantha and Radwin Elhassan as directors and shareholders of Cassius Mining Limited in the Company’s incorporation documents submitted in support of the application for the PL have been convicted for various offences in Australia and thus not qualified to have been named directors of the Company.”
The Role NORPRA
At this juncture, one might be wondering how the Minerals Commission and the Minister uncovered the hidden information leading to the decision to reject the licence extension request.
The Northern Patriot in Research and Advocacy – NORPRA, a Civil Society Organization (CSO) in the northern part of Ghana played a leading role to the revelation of the past records of the named directors and shareholders.
Executive Director of NORPRA, Bismark Adongo tells Brand Focus Africa that a collaborative Beneficial Ownership & Integrity Screening research it conducted with the support of Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and Transparency International led to the discovery of the background of the directors of Cassius Mining.
He says the interest of NORPRA was stirred to dig into the background of the company after the government decided to make a U-turn and allocated a concession originally demarcated for small-scale mining to the company for large-scale mining in Talensi.
Bismark Adongo says the company was given preferential treatment, hence the decision to find out who are the real owners of the entity.
“You want to find out why that preferential treatment. Why that change of mind, why that change of policy decision or administrative decision? So, that made us begin to look at who is this company. Who are the people in this company? So, that was our motivation,” he indicated.
Although there were a number of legal threats from the supposed lawyers of the company, the Executive Director noted that they were resilient to get to the bottom of the case.
The Crimes
With collaboration from other international CSOs, as well as documents received from the Supreme Court of Australia, Anthony Upul Samantha, one of the named directors of the company, it was revealed had been sentenced to four and half years for pleading guilty to 19 charges of market manipulations.
Radwin Elhassan, another director and shareholder of Cassius Mining had his case started from February 2003 to May 2003. He was allegedly convicted of the possession of 28 kilograms of narcotic drugs.
Bismark Adongo further revealed that all these findings were documented. Following the conclusion of the findings, NORPRA then petitioned the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the Attorney-General, and the Minister for Justice for the appropriate measures to be taken.
“We petitioned the IGP at the time, we petitioned the Interior Minister, and follow up with the meeting, we petitioned the Attorney General and Minister of Justice,” the Executive Director of NORPRA told Brand Focus Africa.
It was the findings of the NORPRA’s Beneficial Ownership & Integrity Screening research that played a pivotal role in the Minerals Commission and the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources decision to reject Cassius Mining’s PL extension request in January 2020.
The Legal Tussles
The decision of the Minister which was opposed by Cassius Mining Limited escalated into a legal tussle. In 2023, the High Court ruled against Cassius’s attempt to resolve the matter through an international tribunal, citing the terms of the company’s mining licence. The court further barred the company from taking the case beyond Ghana’s jurisdiction.
Despite these legal setbacks, Cassius has pressed forward, filing a case with the London Court of International Arbitration.
The mining company alleges that Ghana’s refusal to renew its license has effectively stripped it of the full value and potential profits of its gold project. Based on its expert assessments from Australia and the United States, Cassius has pegged its estimated losses at $277 million and is demanding that the Court of International Arbitration compels Ghana to pay the same.
DON’T MISS: Ghana’s Airbnb Boom Hits Hotel Bookings This ‘Detty December”
The government has not publicly commented on this fresh international dispute. It is also unclear the next line of action it will take to amicably address the issue without paying such a huge judgment debt at a time when the country’s finances are already strained.
