Nana Appiah Mensah, popularly known as NAM1, has told the High Court in Accra that one of his companies, Brew Marketing Consult, was established on the advice of the central bank to address public confusion surrounding the operations of Menzgold Ghana Limited.
Testifying before the High Court in Accra presided over by Justice Sedinam Awo Kwadam, NAM1 said the creation of Brew Marketing Consult followed engagements with the Bank of Ghana over concerns about the business model and naming of his companies.
NAM1, who is standing trial alongside his companies, faces 39 counts of offences brought by the Attorney-General. The charges include money laundering, abetment, defrauding by false pretence, carrying on deposit-taking without a licence, and unlawful deposit-taking. The current charges represent a reduction from an initial 61 counts.
While being led in evidence by defence counsel, Paa Joy A. Boateng, NAM1 recounted the history of Menzgold’s incorporation and regulatory engagements. He explained that Menzgold was originally incorporated as Menzbank Ghana Company Limited, with the intention of operating as a bullion bank.
According to him, the company’s name later drew regulatory attention after the central bank published a list of unlicensed microfinance institutions that included Menzbank. NAM1 said his lawyers subsequently wrote to the central bank to clarify that the company was not a microfinance institution, prompting a request for supporting documents and a meeting with officials.
He said the central bank then advised the company to modify its name to eliminate the perceived defect. This led to the transition from Menzbank to Menzbanc and eventually to Menzgold Ghana Limited.
NAM1 further testified that despite the name change, concerns persisted as the central bank continued to receive enquiries from members of the public seeking confirmation of the company’s regulatory status.
He explained that the central bank specifically advised that the retail of gold jewellery products be handled by a separate entity, while Menzgold focused on gold trading activities.
“In effect, it was the Bank of Ghana that advised the setting up of Brew Marketing Consult,” NAM1 stated.
During proceedings, defence counsel requested an extension of time to file approximately 20 witness statements and review more than 100 documents, some of which were said to be held by state institutions.
The prosecution, led by Watkins Adama, opposed the request, arguing that the defence had been given ample time since July 2024 to comply with the court’s directive. Counsel for the third accused, Yaw Kyere, also sought an adjournment to familiarise himself with the case, having recently filed an appointment of counsel.
The prosecution objected, describing the application as premature. In her ruling, Justice Kwadam declined both requests, stating that the defence remained at liberty to file its witness statements but that the trial would proceed.NAM1 subsequently tendered documents relating to the incorporation of his companies, which were admitted into evidence.
Attempts to introduce photocopies of identification cards purportedly linked to licences drew objections from the prosecution. NAM1 also testified that Menzgold initially obtained a licence from the Precious Minerals Marketing Company (PMMC) in 2014, which he said was renewed without sanctions.
He added that the company later applied for authorisation from the Minerals Commission of Ghana, citing changes in the regulatory environment and the expansion of business activities. The following is what transpired in the courtroom.
Paa Joy A. Boateng – NAM1 defence counsel: At the last adjourned date, the court ordered the accused person to file his witness statements failing which he will be required to proceed with his oral testimony. Indeed, the court was magnanimous to accommodate over a week for this order to be complied with and for us to hold a CMC today. I regret to state, however, that we tried as we did, it was impossible to complete all the witness statements about 20 in number.
Also, there are over 100 of documents, which we were reviewing and some of which are with some state institutions yet to be received to help in the defence of the A1 in particular. We are praying you this morning to extend time to finalize these processes in the interest of justice.
Watkins Adama – prosecutor: Respectfully, the order or directive of the court to file witness statements or give oral testimony was given as far back as July 11, 2024. Counsel representing A1 and A2 came into this matter on Dec 18, 2025. The order of the court was impressed on him to comply if they chose to rely on witness statements.
Since then, they have filed copious documents before this court and the Supreme Court to the neglect of filing the witness statement. Your ladyship has been very clear that in the absence of witness statements, trial will proceed as it has been done the last few adjournments. We are ready as prosecution to proceed with trial today the business being further examination in chief by way of defence for the first accused.
This court gave a cue that they need not file witness statements for all witnesses they intended to call at the same time the first accused person is presently making a defence and at least one would’ve thought that a witness statement will be filed in defence of A1 to enable us conduct CMC. Our humble prayer to this court is to order the continuation of the trial .
Yaw Kyere counsel for A3: Having been appointed as counsel in this matter and looking at the volume that has been done at the stage the trial has reached, we will be afforded some time to bring ourselves up to speed with the proceedings thus far.
We pray so because it is likely that we will be invited in no time looking at the stage of the trial to cross-examine the first accused person. We will be grateful if subject to your pleasure an adjournment is granted to bring ourselves up to speed to properly advise the 3rd accused.
Watkins: Respectfully, not forsaking the doctrine of separate legal personality and the fact that this court made no order piercing any corporate veil. I submit strongly, however, that this is an attempt to further delay the trial process. Counsel for A3 has all the time between now and whenever he may be called upon to cross-examine any party in this matter to make adequate preparations to do so.
The prayer for an adjournment is premature, especially when the business for today is focused on the defence of A1. We pray humbly that we proceed.
By court: Counsel for A2, the defence is still at liberty to file whenever they intend, inability is no bar to the cross examination. Counsel for A3, by the time it may be your turn, you’d have prepared. Your prayer is also rejected. We will not give you time to do that.
Further evidence in chief of A1.
Q: At the last adjoined date, you testified as to the incorporation status and licensing of A2 . Kindly continue with your testimony in that respect?
A: In respect of the incorporation status and by extension the licenses of A2 as I intimated in the previous session, it is important to situate the company’s names into proper perspective on the basis of the fact that the licenses I referred wielded and operated with by the second accused were issued in different names.
So my lady, Menzgold was originally incorporated as Menzbank Ghana Company Limited intended to set up and operate as the first “bullion” bank in West Africa if not AfricanX
In pursuit of wanting to realise its vision as the first “bullion” bank in Africa, the BoG issued a publication including A2’s name as part of unlicensed micro finance institutions so counsel for A2 then wrote a letter to BoG after having cited the publication in the dailies informing them of the fact that A2 is not a Microfinance institution and humbly requested that A2’s name be expunged from the list of unlicensed mico finance institutions.
The Central Bank responded requesting for all supporting documents and invited us for meeting. As a law abiding entity, we submitted the PMMC license and all other documentation they requested of which they acknowledged receipt and A2 was subsequently granted an opportunity for a meeting that was chaired by Mr Amoh Awuah and other officers of the Central Bank to adequately speak to the issues of which we did to the best of our ability.
In the meeting, it was resolved that our name as part of the publication was a mistaken identity stemming from the fact that Menzbank depicts or suggestive of financial institution which is why A2’s name was part of the publication.
Consequently, the central bank advised that we tweak our company’s name a bit to cure that defect and so more specifically, our team and that of the central bank collectively resolved that Menzbank with a “k” will be changed to one with a “c” to ensure consistency, which is a cardinal element in business administration. So Menzbank was changed to Menzbanc on the advice of the BoG.
In the course of our operations, the BoG, reached out to us again after several months of having compelled with the advice to change the name, asked us to attend another meeting of which we did.
At the meeting, among other things that I can’t clearly recollect, the prime concern was to the effect that the central bank keeps getting phone calls from members of the public enquiring as to whether Menzbanc is a licensed financial institution.
Which stemmed from main factors: 1. That the name Menzbanc still depicts a financial institution and so members of the public who are delirious of doing business with our company as part of their due diligence standards often calls the Central Bank to make enquiries.
2. Was on the basis that our gold bullion: gold jewelry products/ tablets sold to buyers in our reception often opted to be traded for extra values within the trading period has a semblance of financial investment.
So these were the two main concerns at the second meeting. After thorough discussions and considerations, the central bank instructed that for us to continue to do business, devoid of confusion and controversies and the numerous calls that were coming to their front desk, they specifically instructed that we separate the sale of the gold jewelry products and the gold trading – buying and selling, by Menzgold.
It was importance to set up another distinct entity to handle the retail of the gold jewelry products whiles Menzgold focuses mainly on its good trading business area of which we accepted. In effect, it was the BoG that advised the setting up of Brew Marketing Consult.
Q: You have testified that Menzgold Ghana Limited (A2) was originally incorporated as Menzbank. Do you have the evidence of this original incorporation?
A: Your lordship, I do have in my hands, a copy of the incorporation certificates of Menzbank and Menzgold.
As my lawyer indicated prior, most of the supporting documents that would enable us mount an incontrovertible defence must be in the custody of EOCO since they preserved all our offices and all company assets whiles I was out of this jurisdiction under a harrowing detention in UAE when I went to recoup our company’s 750 kg of gold bars at the then value of approximately of $28 million dollars and today’s value of over $90 million dollars, which formed part of the gold jewellery tablets that had been brought up for trade and was framed and prosecuted.
Q: What do you intend to do with the incorporation documents you ascribe to Menzbank Ghana Ltd and Menzgold?
A: Your Ladyship, with your kind indulgence, I would want to tender them into evidence.
Court: evidence Admitted
Q: Explain to the court the different names on the documents you just tendered relative to A2?
Prosecution: This is an invitation to repeat the lengthy narration.
Q: Aside the incorporation of A2 whose name was changed from Menbank Ghana Limited to Menzbanc and came to Menzgold Company Ltd, explain to the court how A2 obtained this authorization from PMMC?
A: Just as I indicated in the last adjourned date, A2, at all times was licensed to carry on its business operations. The first license A2 was granted was from the PMMC. After having submitted an application letter in 2014. A2 was granted the license that same year. The relevant fees were fully paid when the approval was granted and the license card subsequently issued for a validity of 12 months from the date of issued.
It’s important to note that in the application letter, the exact business areas were stated, which were to be subjected to their internal compliance prior to the approval. Again, within the period of the license, if a license holder is in contravention of any of the licensing authority’s rules of engagement, the license issued is either suspended or cancelled.
May I submit respectfully that after the first license which was valid for 12 months, and its subsequent renewal until A2 application to the Minerals Commission, there was no sanction whatsoever from PMMC, hence by inference I can confidently say that our company operated within the parameters of the licenses agreement.
Q: Do you have evidence of this license or authorization from PMMC.
A: I have evidence to that effect.
Objection: this is a copy of what appears to be photocopies of two separate ID cards.
Q: At then last adjourned date you had also testified that aside A2 having been licensed by the then PMMC, A2 subsequently obtained a licence by the Minerals Commission?
A: That is so, my Lord.
Q: Can you explain to the court the processes leading to A2 being licensed by the Minerals Commission.
A: As I sit here, at the last adjourned date, two main reasons led to a shift of PMMC as the then licensing authority to the Minerals Commission. The first reason was the fact that A2, an organisation that has commenced relatively small became very successful and big with few other branches in Ghana largely due to effective management, vision, resourcefulness and more importantly regulatory compliance.
The second reason was to fact that the gold exporters association of Ghana sued PMMC around 2015/16 thereabout because PMMC introduced a regulation that sought to infringe on their commercial and economic right. So there was some form of settlement and an award that was granted by the court, which changed PMMC’s from a licensing authority to a national asayer. This was what led the setting up of PMMC at the airport with the mandate to assay all gold dorri bars from Ghana.
On the back of this two reasons, PMMC stopped issuing licensing and even if they did with the expansion of our company, with the introduction of other business areas like gold vaulting/storage, smelting and assaying, amid addition/minting that is the production of the gold jewellery tablets (billions) for the local and international markets, a licence from the PMMC was or would have been unsustainable. Hence A2’s application to the Minerals Commission of Ghana, which was a statutory body established by the Minerals and Mining Act, (Act 703)
Q: Do you have evidence of any said agreement and or license with or from the Minerals Commission with A2?
A: I do have in my hands a copy of the said license agreement. I pray you to permit me to tender it in evidence.
Court: Copies of the agreement and the license admitted in evidence and to be marked on the next adjourned date.
Case adjourns to March 5 at 11am.
For more news, join The Chronicle Newspaper channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBSs55E50UqNPvSOm2z
