By Our Correspondent, Terchire
The Concerned Farmers Association of Afrisipakrom, Terchire, Susuanso and Adrobaa in the Ahafo Region has strongly rejected Newmont’s petition to the Lands Commission describing the structures of 21 of its members as “speculative,” warning that the petition was deliberately delaying the payment of compensation approved under compulsory acquisition instrument Executive Instrument (E.I.) 273 of 2024.
Related Stories
Addressing the media at Terchire in the Tano North Municipality, Ahafo Region on Monday, November 2, the Chairman of the Association, John Mensah, said the farmers received a letter dated 9th June, 2026 from the Lands Commission informing their representatives that Newmont had submitted a petition claiming that some structures belonging to 21 members should not receive compensation.
There is also the separate case of other farmers whose lands and properties were taken under E.I. 356 of 2023. Those members have received no compensation at all,” he averred.
Consequently, the Commission asked for the Association’s comments to enable it to decide on the matter.
We also want to respond to Newmont’s petition to the Lands Commission describing our structures as ‘speculative’. We reject this claim. We are concerned that this petition is delaying the payment of compensation by the Lands Commission for our structures under compulsory acquisition E.I. 273 of 2024,” he said.
“Our position is clear: our structures are not speculative under either the mining laws or the Land Act. We strongly reject the claim that our structures are “speculative”. These structures existed long before Newmont planned to extend its mining operations into our area. We lived in them and used them for farming and other farming-related businesses. They were part of our everyday lives and the means by which we supported our families. It is deeply unfair to take our lands, destroy our properties and then describe those properties as “speculative” when it is time to pay compensation,” he declared.
According to the Chairman, the Association’s lawyer and valuers responded to the Commission’s request and rejected Newmont’s claim as unfounded.
THE LEGAL BATTLEGROUND: MINING LAW VERSUS LAND ACT
At the heart of the dispute is which law governs the compensation. Mensah explained that Newmont relied on the Minerals and Mining Act and an alleged cut-off date set in 2017 under the mining regulations to challenge compensation for the structures and describe them as “speculative.”
He said this position was “shocking and unfair,” because the process under the mining law had been abandoned in dealing with the farmers. He recounted that the Government had earlier granted Newmont a mining concession in the Tano North Municipality under the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), which was different from the State compulsorily acquiring the lands under the Land Act, 2020 (Act 1036).
That grant was different from the State compulsorily acquiring our lands under the Land Act, 2020, Act 1036,” he explained.
He said that when the Government in 2023 proceeded under the Land Act to compulsorily acquire selected lands for Newmont’s mining operations and related activities, including lands belonging to members of the Association, the legal basis for compensation shifted.
The State had now acquired our lands under a different law, the Land Act. This meant that compensation for that compulsory acquisition must be assessed and paid under the Land Act. We therefore submitted ourselves to the procedures under that Act,” he stated.
“We find this shocking and unfair. This is because the process under that mining law had been abandoned in dealing with us and the State had instead used the Land Act, 2020, Act 1036, to acquire our lands for Newmont. We therefore question why Newmont is now returning to the earlier law to challenge payment for our structures,” he said.
THE LAND ACT DEFINITION OF “SPECULATIVE”
Mensah drew a sharp distinction between the two legal regimes, explaining that under the Land Act, a property was described as speculative only when improvements were made after the Government had published its notice to acquire the land.
We reject that approach in assessing compensation. Under the land law, Act 1036, a property is described as speculative when improvements made after the Government publishes its notice to acquire the land. It makes no reference to an alleged mining cutoff date,” he said.
He stressed that the Association’s structures were built long before any acquisition notice was published and that they are not speculative under either the mining laws or the Land Act.
SIGNED RECORDS CONTRADICT THE PETITION
The Association further argued that Newmont’s own representatives signed joint enumeration records during a 2024 exercise, contradicting the company’s current claim that the structures should not be compensated.
Mensah recounted that following the difficulties with the first acquisition in 2023, the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources at the time established a Ministerial Committee including Nananom (Chiefs) from the affected communities, representatives of relevant state institutions, lawyers for affected farmers and Newmont, to discuss compensation in an effort to reach an agreement and avoid another compulsory acquisition.
As part of this process, he said, Newmont, the affected farmers and representatives of the Lands Commission jointly inspected, counted and recorded the affected crops and structures, supervised by the Committee chaired by the then Deputy Executive Secretary of the Lands Commission.
The crop records were completed and signed by the affected farmer, the chief farmer, a Newmont representative and a representative of the Land Valuation Division of Lands Commission,” he said.
“The structure records were also completed and signed by the affected farmer, the surveyor, representatives of the Land Valuation Division, a representative of the Resettlement Negotiation Committee and a Newmont representative. The properties identified as qualifying for compensation were then presented to the Committee,” he added.
The Chairman said these records form part of the evidence that must be considered fairly when deciding the claims.
We again draw attention to the joint records made during the 2024 exercise. Newmont’s representatives signed those records alongside the affected farmers and representatives of the Lands Commission. The records confirm that the structures were identified and recorded. They form part of the evidence that must be considered fairly when deciding our claims,” he stated.
A PROCESS COMPLETED, THEN STALLED
According to Mr Mensah, the compensation process had in fact been completed before Newmont’s petition. After almost two years of the second acquisition, in a letter dated 13th April 2026, the Lands Commission, through its Valuation Technical Committee, approved compensation amounts for crops, structures and lands acquired under E.I. 273.
There is also the separate case of other farmers whose lands and properties were taken under E.I. 356 of 2023. Those members have received no compensation at all,” he indicated.
With the farmers’ consent and approval, their lawyers and valuers accepted those amounts in a letter dated 24th April 2026 to the Lands Commission.
After going through these processes, we expected payment. Instead, we faced another obstacle,” the Chairman said.
He said the Association wants the Commission to resolve the outstanding issues without further delay and pay compensation for all structures under E.I. 273.
“We ask the Commission to resolve the outstanding issues without further delay and pay compensation for all our structures under E.I. 273,” he demanded.
