BY Daniel Bampoe
Member of Parliament for Tano North and economist, Dr. Gideon Boako, has declared what he describes as a vindication of earlier warnings he issued about the financial condition of the Bank of Ghana, following recent policy reversals by the Central Bank.
In a strongly worded statement, the spokesperson to ex-Vice President Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia argued that recent actions taken by the Bank of Ghana confirm concerns repeatedly raised by the Minority over the country’s monetary policy direction and the growing losses recorded by the Central Bank.
According to Dr. Boako, earlier this year he publicly predicted that the Bank of Ghana’s audited financial statements would reveal “substantial losses,” a claim he said government communicators and political opponents initially dismissed as false and politically motivated.
However, after the Bank of Ghana eventually released its audited 2025 financial statements, the institution confirmed a major operating loss, sparking intense political debate between the governing National Democratic Congress and the opposition New Patriotic Party over the causes of the losses and the true condition of the Central Bank.
The debate has since dominated the economic and political space, with the Minority Caucus insisting that the losses were not simply the “cost of economic stabilization,” as government officials have argued, but rather the consequence of poor monetary policy decisions and politically motivated interventions.
Dr. Boako maintained that one of the major causes of the Bank’s financial deterioration was the reversal of the previous administration’s Cash Reserve Ratio framework, particularly policies affecting foreign currency deposits held by commercial banks.
According to him, the previous Bank of Ghana management had introduced measures designed to mop up excess liquidity at lower cost, including the dynamic Cash Reserve Ratio system and the cedi-equivalent reserve requirement for foreign exchange deposits.
The Minority has consistently argued that those mechanisms helped stabilize liquidity in the banking sector without forcing the Central Bank to spend excessively on costly Open Market Operations.
However, after the change in government, the new monetary policy direction reportedly relaxed some of those reserve requirements, a move opposition figures say contributed to increased sterilization costs and deeper financial strain on the Bank of Ghana’s books.
Dr. Boako stated that when he initially linked the Central Bank’s worsening losses to those policy reversals, his claims were strongly rejected by government communicators and pro-government analysts.
But in what he described as a major turnaround, the Bank of Ghana this week reportedly revised the dynamic Cash Reserve Ratio and restored aspects of the foreign exchange deposit reserve framework introduced under the previous administration.
To the Tano North MP, the latest policy adjustments amount to an indirect admission that earlier warnings from the Minority were accurate.
“Yesterday [Wednesday], the Bank of Ghana revised the dynamic Cash Reserve Ratio and reversed the CRR for foreign exchange deposits that had been implemented by the previous administration,” he stated.
Dr. Boako suggested that the latest policy changes reinforce the argument that the Bank’s losses were tied more to policy reversals than to unavoidable macroeconomic stabilization costs.
The economist further hinted that additional changes could soon emerge within Ghana’s banking system regarding foreign exchange deposits and liquidity management.
According to him, more developments are expected from next month, although he predicted that his warnings would again initially be dismissed before eventually materializing.
“Later this week, I’ll share what I expect to happen in the banking system regarding FX deposits from next month. They’ll call it a lie again, but it will happen,” he stated.
The latest comments add to mounting pressure on the government and the Bank of Ghana following weeks of controversy over the Central Bank’s 2025 financial statements.
The Minority Caucus in Parliament has already accused the government of politicizing the Bank’s financial disclosures and concealing the true scale of the institution’s losses, while calling for urgent reforms and a transparent recapitalization plan.
Meanwhile, government officials and members of the Majority Caucus continue to defend the Bank’s actions, insisting the costs reflected deliberate interventions that helped stabilize inflation, strengthen the cedi, and rebuild Ghana’s foreign reserves.
Despite those assurances, the political battle over the Bank of Ghana’s losses and monetary policy direction appears far from over, with opposition figures increasingly framing recent policy reversals as evidence that their earlier criticisms were justified.
