Minority Demands Full Parliamentary Probe into GoldBod Operations Over $214 Million Loss

BY Daniel Bampoe 

The Minority in Parliament has mounted a strong challenge to the operations of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), calling for an urgent, bipartisan parliamentary investigation into what it describes as a troubling loss of public funds linked to the government’s gold trading programme.

Addressing a press conference in Accra, the Minority Leader’s caucus, led by Ofoase–Ayirebi MP Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, said the country could no longer ignore growing red flags surrounding the Gold-for-Reserves initiative, which was originally introduced to strengthen the foreign exchange position and stabilise the cedi.

According to the Minority, the programme has instead evolved into a system riddled with opacity, questionable transactions, and potential financial mismanagement.

The Minority cited figures contained in recent International Monetary Fund (IMF) assessments indicating that Ghana may have incurred losses of approximately $214 million under the gold trading arrangement.

While acknowledging that the programme was initially conceived as a strategic intervention to shore up reserves, the caucus argued that its current execution has deviated sharply from that objective.

Speaking on behalf of the Minority, Mr. Oppong Nkrumah stated that Parliament has a constitutional responsibility to demand answers where public funds are concerned.

He stressed that the issue transcends partisan politics and goes to the heart of fiscal accountability and national interest.

“The Ghanaian people deserve clarity on how a programme designed to strengthen our economy has instead resulted in significant financial exposure,” he said.

“This is not about political point-scoring. It is about safeguarding the public purse.”

Central to the Minority’s concerns is the structure of the GoldBod’s operations, particularly its relationship with intermediaries involved in gold aggregation and export.

The caucus questioned how certain private entities came to occupy such strategic positions within the gold value chain and whether proper procurement and due diligence procedures were followed.

They also raised alarm over what they described as a lack of transparency in pricing mechanisms, foreign exchange arrangements, and contractual terms between the Bank of Ghana, GoldBod, and third-party operators.

According to the Minority, these gaps make it difficult to determine whether the state is receiving fair value or bearing disproportionate risk.

Beyond financial considerations, the Minority highlighted environmental and governance concerns, arguing that the current system may be inadvertently enabling illegal mining activities.

They warned that without stringent traceability and enforcement measures, state-backed gold purchasing could unintentionally legitimize gold sourced through environmentally destructive practices.

In light of these concerns, the Minority formally called for the establishment of a bipartisan parliamentary ad hoc committee with powers to summon documents, compel testimony, and investigate all agreements linked to the GoldBod operations.

They also urged that permits for gold purchasing in ecologically sensitive areas be suspended pending a full review.

Additionally, the Minority demanded that the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod publicly disclose all fee structures, pricing models, and contractual obligations related to the programme.

They insisted that any official found to have acted negligently or unlawfully must be held accountable, including through prosecution where necessary.

The Minority’s intervention follows public assurances from GoldBod management that the institution has not incurred losses and that it remains on course to generate significant foreign exchange inflows.

GoldBod’s leadership has maintained that it merely acts as an agent for the Bank of Ghana and that its operations have strengthened the country’s external position.

However, the opposition maintains that such assurances do not substitute for independent scrutiny.

They argue that only a transparent, bipartisan inquiry can restore public confidence and determine whether the gold resources are being managed in the national interest.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *