BY Daniel Bampoe
The Centre for Democratic Movement (CDM) has sounded a strong alarm over what it describes as deepening contradictions, governance lapses, and credibility concerns surrounding Ghana’s Gold-for-Reserves programme and the operations of GoldBod.
In a detailed public statement, the civil society group accused the leadership of GoldBod of offering inconsistent explanations on the financial performance of the programme, thereby eroding public trust and raising serious questions about accountability in the management of the country’s gold resources.
According to the CDM, recent public pronouncements by the Chief Executive Officer of GoldBod, Mr. Sammy Gyamfi, reveal troubling inconsistencies that cannot be dismissed as mere communication errors.
The group recalled that on December 24, 2025, the GoldBod CEO publicly rejected claims that the Bank of Ghana had incurred losses under the Gold-for-Reserves initiative, insisting that reports of a US$214 million loss were inaccurate and misleading.
Yet, barely days later, he reportedly acknowledged that GoldBod had recorded losses amounting to approximately GHS 3.3 billion.
To the CDM, these two positions are fundamentally irreconcilable.
The group argues that an institution cannot, in good faith, deny the existence of losses only to later confirm them under public pressure. Such reversals, it says, undermine confidence in both the leadership of GoldBod and the broader management of Ghana’s gold sector.
The organisation further referenced financial data published by the Bank of Ghana, which indicate that the central bank recorded total operational losses of about GHS 9.49 billion for the year, with roughly GHS 3.49 billion attributed to exchange rate revaluations
According to the CDM, only about GHS 1.8 billion of that figure is directly linked to gold purchase operations.
While this distinction is important, the group insists that it does not absolve GoldBod of responsibility, particularly in light of disclosures that some losses arose from actual trading activities rather than accounting adjustments.
Of particular concern to the CDM is the revelation that GoldBod may have incurred losses through the buying and selling of gold itself.
The group argues that this raises fundamental questions about the competence of the trading model adopted and the safeguards that were—or were not—put in place to protect public funds.
In its view, no public institution entrusted with a strategic national resource should operate in a manner that exposes the state to avoidable financial losses.
The statement further criticises what it describes as shifting narratives and a lack of transparency from GoldBod’s leadership.
According to the CDM, the evolving explanations given to the public suggest an attempt to manage perception rather than provide full and accurate disclosure.
This, the group warns, undermines public confidence and weakens institutional credibility.
Against this backdrop, the CDM has issued a direct call to the President to intervene. It is urging that the Chief Executive Officer of GoldBod be asked to step aside to allow for an independent, impartial, and comprehensive investigation into the Gold-for-Reserves programme and the broader operations of the institution.
The group stresses that such a step would not amount to a declaration of guilt but would serve as a necessary safeguard to protect the integrity of the investigative process.
In addition, the CDM is demanding a full forensic audit of GoldBod’s activities, including the disclosure of all gold purchase agreements, pricing structures, trading partners, and approval processes.
It also wants Parliament to exercise its oversight mandate to ensure that any official found to have acted negligently or improperly is held accountable.
