BY Nadia Ntiamoah
The Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), the government agency mandated to formalise and regulate the domestic gold trade, has come under fresh public scrutiny after a Ghanaian lawyer filed a sweeping Right to Information (RTI) request demanding unprecedented transparency over the agency’s operations.
The move is fueling concerns about whether the state-backed gold-purchasing scheme—introduced as a safeguard against illegal mining and illicit exports—may itself be vulnerable to opacity, weak controls, and political interference.
Legal practitioner Eric Dawda, in a letter addressed to GoldBod and copied to its CEO, Sammy Gyamfi, is seeking detailed records of every small-scale miner and licensed mining company that has supplied gold to the Board since its establishment.
The request covers names, licence numbers, transaction dates, volumes of gold sold, and the geographical source of the gold—information that has never been made public, despite GoldBod’s growing influence over the small-scale mining value chain.
A Sector Plagued by Secrecy
GoldBod was created as part of the National Democratic Congress government’s efforts to tighten control over a sector long associated with corruption, smuggling, and galamsey-linked environmental destruction.
While the agency’s mandate includes purchasing gold legally from vetted miners, civil society groups have repeatedly questioned whether the Board itself has adequate oversight systems or whether politically connected actors are being allowed to benefit quietly.
The lawyer’s request appears to tap directly into these lingering suspicions.
According to Dawda, publishing a full and verifiable list of GoldBod’s suppliers is essential to ensure that unlicensed miners, illegitimate dealers, or illegal mining syndicates are not using the state agency as a laundering channel to legitimise their operations.
“Only legal small-scale miners must trade with the Gold Board,” he insisted, warning that the lack of transparency could unintentionally legitimise actors who fuel illegal mining.
Demand for Internal Documents Raises Red Flags
Beyond the supplier list, Dawda’s request probes deeper into the machinery of GoldBod’s operations—raising questions that go to the heart of whether the agency has robust systems in place. He is demanding:
All policy and operational documents governing the buying and selling of gold
Mechanisms for financial control, administration, and procurement
Detailed inflow and outflow records since GoldBod’s establishment
Guidelines and procedures for how the Board assays, values, purchases, and exports gold
A full account of all gold exported by GoldBod to date
Observers say these are precisely the documents that would expose weaknesses or irregularities in an institution if any exist. The request touches on procurement—an area historically prone to abuse in the extractives sector—and on export mechanisms, which have been the focus of past scandals involving undervaluation and revenue leakages.
Ghana’s Gold Export Controversies
Ghana’s gold sector has been repeatedly rocked by scandals involving missing royalties, falsified export documents, and politically connected gold traders.
The creation of GoldBod was widely seen as a reform measure to centralise oversight, but critics argue that its opaque operations and lack of public reporting raise questions about whether it has improved transparency or merely shifted the bottlenecks.
Since its formation, the Board has not publicly released data on its transactions or suppliers—a contrast to the Minerals Commission and the PMMC, which periodically publish sectoral statistics.
The absence of disclosure has fueled speculation about preferential treatment, sweetheart deals, and possible use of the agency to sanitise questionable gold.
RTI Act Puts Pressure on GoldBod
Under the RTI Act, 2019 (Act 989), GoldBod is legally mandated to respond within statutory timelines unless the requested information falls under legally exempt categories such as national security or trade secrets.
However, transparency advocates argue that supplier lists and financial controls cannot reasonably be classified as confidential, given that they involve public resources and mineral assets belonging to the state.
Dawda has warned that he will use “all legitimate means” provided under the law if the agency fails to comply—an indication that a legal battle could be looming if the Board attempts to withhold information.
