- From PR Spin to Hard Evidence: Why E&P Now Owns Azumah
At the heart of the takeover of Azumah Resources Ghana Ltd lies an honestly simple question: who really owns the company?
NorvanReports has sighted incorporation records showing that Azumah Resources Ghana Ltd was registered at the Registrar-General’s Department with a stated capital of GH₵26,190.53. That figure am sure, all of us and many who can check will know that it is far below the US$1 million minimum threshold required under Ghanaian law for foreign-owned companies. By law and logic, then, Azumah was registered as a Ghanaian-owned company, not as the foreign-controlled entity its former controllers now claim it to be.
If Azumah was Ghanaian, as the Registrar’s records suggest, then the transfer of shares from Ghanaian beneficial owners to Engineers & Planners (E&P) on 3 September 2025 was lawful. Yet Azumah’s overseas promoters, led by Australian businessman James Wallbank, insist otherwise. The contradiction goes to the heart of Ghana’s mining credibility and raises troubling questions about misrepresentation, lobbying, and the use of public relations in place of proper legal processes.
The filings at the Registrar-General’s Department are clear. They show the allotment of 93.4 million shares in Azumah Resources Ghana Ltd and 3 million shares in Upwest Resources Ltd to Engineers & Planners. From a regulatory perspective, ownership has changed hands.
Yet within days of the filings, a press release emerged from a London-based PR agency denying that any takeover had occurred. The statement, circulated on Azumah letterhead but unsigned by any company officer, claimed E&P had unlawfully seized the concessions. It threatened billion-dollar arbitration claims against Ghana and painted a picture of regulatory breakdown.
E&P’s lawyer, Bobby Banson, has dismissed the release as meaningless.
“It must be a named officer of the company before such a statement can be ascribed to Azumah. A PR firm’s signature does not overturn filings at the Registrar of Companies,” Banson said in an interview.
His point is difficult to dispute. Corporate governance rests on filings and official signatures, not on outsourced press campaigns.
The GH₵26,190.53 capital figure casts a long shadow over James Wallbank’s Australian Azumah’s denials. If the company had genuinely been foreign-owned, as he and his allies have suggested, it would have been legally impossible to register with so little capital. Ghana’s laws are explicit: foreign-owned firms must register with a minimum of US$1 million, especially since this is also a mining firm.
The contradiction raises suspicions of deliberate misrepresentation. Why claim foreign ownership when the Registrar’s books show otherwise? Why rely on activists and PR firms rather than presenting evidence of beneficial ownership to regulators?
Reliable sources have told NorvanReports that when pressed on who actually owned Azumah, Wallbank and his associates pointed vaguely to “some Americans”. But when confronted again with the Registrar filings, they reportedly retreated from the discussion.
At one stage, the group is said to have approached one of Ghana’s most respected mining figures to mediate. Yet when asked to identify the real beneficial owners, the story shifted once more. Such evasions deepen the mystery and raise the stakes for Ghanaian regulators.
My good friend Bright Simons amplified Azumah’s denials, casting the dispute as evidence of corporate overreach. But the reliance on press statements, tweets, and activist platforms has done little to resolve the underlying ownership question. If anything, it has highlighted the weakness of the case being made.
By relying on PR firms and public opinion rather than legal officers and documentation, Mr Wallbank and his partners risk undermining the very credibility they claim to defend. Business disputes are settled in registries, courts, and arbitration panels, not in press releases crafted in London.
On the other side, Engineers & Planners has been consistent. Its filings are in order, its transfer of shares is recorded, and it has positioned itself as both willing and able to assume Azumah Ghana’s obligations.
“We have taken over all of Azumah Resources’ assets and liabilities. We expect them to make available all relevant documents so we can facilitate payments,” Banson said.
E&P has invited creditors to present verified claims, pledged to work with the Ghana Revenue Authority to audit debts, and committed to clearing all legitimate liabilities. The company argues that its track record as one of West Africa’s largest mining contractors gives it the technical capacity to move swiftly into development.
“They followed due process, and there was no objection from the Minerals Commission. All legal requirements have been fulfilled by E&P,” Banson added.
Perhaps the most telling verdict has come not from lawyers or lobbyists but from the workers on the ground in Ghana’s Upper West Region. News of E&P’s takeover was greeted with jubilation. Employees staged a spontaneous celebration, enskinning one Hector as “King of Patience” and hailing four senior staff as the “Four Angels who brought the Good News.”
For communities that have waited years for promised development, the symbolism was powerful. Where others had delayed and disputed, E&P’s arrival was seen as the beginning of jobs, investment, and progress.
From where I sit in this dispute is a broader test for Ghana’s institutions. Will regulators and courts give weight to official filings and corporate law, or will they allow press campaigns and lobbying to muddy ownership?
The stakes are not just legal but reputational. If documented transfers can be nullified by PR firms and shifting claims of foreign ownership.
For James Wellbeck and his partners, questions now mount:
- Why was Azumah registered with GH₵26,000 if it was truly foreign-owned?
- Why rely on PR agencies and civil society activists instead of company officers and regulators?
- Why invoke “some Americans” as beneficial owners when the Registrar’s books suggest otherwise?
- Why run from the evidence when confronted by Ghanaian authorities?
Until these questions are answered, the credibility of James and his partner’s denials will remain in doubt.
The lesson from this saga is simple. In Ghana, ownership is established in law and filings, not in press releases. E&P has the documents, the regulatory compliance, and now the social license of workers who have waited too long.
If Engineers & Planners can follow through by settling debts, mobilizing capital, and building out Black Volta and Sankofa, it will not only vindicate its acquisition but mark a turning point for indigenous participation in Ghana’s mining industry.
The real test is not whether E&P owns Azumah; the Registrar’s books already say it does. The test is whether Ghana’s institutions can hold firm against noise, enforce its own laws, and support those willing to invest responsibly. For now, the answer from Wa’s jubilant workers is clear. They have crowned a King of Patience and four Angels of Good News. It is time for the regulators, too, to recognise where the evidence points.
