BY Daniel Bampoe
A GH¢121.79 million gold transaction has opened a new window into the risks confronting Ghana’s rapidly expanding gold-trading system, after a Tier-2 gold dealer was accused of collecting funds for the supply of 100 kilogrammes of gold but allegedly delivering only a fraction of the consignment.
At the centre of the controversy is Raymond Okai-Woode, proprietor of McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise, a Tier-2 licence holder operating under the regulatory framework of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod).
According to the case presented before the High Court, Criminal Division, Accra, Okai-Woode received a total of GH¢121,790,725.00 from fellow Tier-2 licence holder William Akatsi, also known as Dela, proprietor of Yassbel Gold Enterprise, for the purchase and supply of 100 kilogrammes of gold.
But instead of delivering the full quantity for which the money had allegedly been advanced, Okai-Woode supplied only 3.86504 kilogrammes, valued at approximately GH¢5,551,817.00, leaving a substantial portion of the transaction unresolved.
The prosecution’s account has now transformed what initially appeared to be a commercial gold transaction into a criminal proceeding, with GoldBod alleging that Okai-Woode breached the conditions attached to his licence and provided false information in relation to the transaction.
The GH¢121.79m Advance
The case dates back to July 2026, when Akatsi, himself a Tier-2 licence holder, was approached by Okai-Woode with an offer to supply a large quantity of gold.
According to the complainant’s statement, Akatsi operates within the GoldBod system under which Tier-2 dealers can receive funds through an approved aggregator to purchase gold for onward supply.
The prosecution says Okai-Woode presented himself as a dealer who already had 100 kilogrammes of gold in his possession and was ready to supply the quantity within 24 hours.
That representation allegedly persuaded Akatsi to advance the full amount required for the transaction.
Within July 2026, Akatsi is said to have transferred or advanced a cumulative GH¢121,790,725.00 to Okai-Woode for the expected supply.
The transaction was reportedly backed by a booking arrangement which, according to the prosecution, contained a representation that the 100 kilogrammes of gold were available and could be delivered within the stipulated 24-hour period.
It is this alleged representation that has become central to the second criminal charge against Okai-Woode.
The Gold That Never Arrived
The expected delivery, however, did not materialise as promised.
On 8 July 2026, Okai-Woode reportedly delivered only 3.86504 kilogrammes of gold, valued at GH¢5,551,817.00.
The quantity represented only a small fraction of the 100 kilogrammes for which the money had allegedly been advanced.
The prosecution says the remaining gold was not supplied despite efforts by Akatsi to secure delivery.
According to the case presented to the court, Okai-Woode subsequently became difficult to reach and allegedly went into hiding.
Akatsi’s attempts to contact him and obtain the outstanding quantity of gold reportedly proved unsuccessful.
The circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the remaining funds and the failure to complete the transaction subsequently triggered investigations.
Where Did The Money Go?
It is the alleged use of the money after it was received that has added another layer to the case.
According to the prosecution’s account, Okai-Woode, after his arrest, admitted during interrogation that he had used the money advanced by Akatsi to settle his own debts.
He reportedly told investigators that Dominic Bonsu Ventures, described in the case as a sub-aggregator, owed him money and that he had been expecting payment from that entity.
The accused allegedly explained that he was waiting for the money owed to him by Dominic Bonsu Ventures so that he could use it to pay Akatsi. Dominic Bonsu has been stripped of the gold buying license by GoldBod.
That account, however, does not explain why funds allegedly advanced specifically for the purchase and supply of 100 kilogrammes of gold were used for another purpose before the promised delivery was completed.
The prosecution’s case is that the manner in which the transaction was conducted amounted to a breach of the conditions governing Okai-Woode’s GoldBod licence.
Importantly, these allegations remain matters for determination by the court, and the filing of charges does not by itself establish criminal guilt.
Goldbod Moves Against Mcwoode Ray 24
The controversy subsequently moved beyond the individual transaction and into the regulatory domain.
On 24 July 2026, GoldBod issued a compliance notice announcing the immediate suspension of the gold-trading licence of McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise.
The notice stated that the suspension followed GoldBod’s determination that the company had breached the terms and conditions of its licence as well as trading directives issued by the Board.
GoldBod said the action was being taken pursuant to the Ghana Gold Board Act, 2025 (Act 1140).
The Board further disclosed that the proprietor of McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise had been arrested and was being prosecuted before the High Court in Accra.
According to GoldBod, he had also been remanded into police custody by order of the High Court pending continuation of the criminal proceedings.
The suspension means that McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise is prohibited from purchasing, selling, aggregating, transporting or engaging in any other transaction involving gold until further notice.
GoldBod consequently directed all licensed buyers, aggregators, self-financing aggregators and miners to cease trading and other commercial dealings with the company in relation to gold transactions.
The Board warned that any individual or entity that facilitates, assists or engages in gold transactions with the suspended company during the period of suspension could face enforcement and regulatory measures under Act 1140.
Two Criminal Counts
The prosecution before the High Court has been framed around two principal allegations.
The first count accuses Raymond Okai-Woode of failing to comply with the terms and conditions of his GoldBod licence, contrary to Section 63(1)(c) and (2) of the Ghana Gold Board Act, 2025 (Act 1140).
The particulars allege that in July 2026, at Dunkwa-Offin in the Central Region, Okai-Woode failed to comply with the conditions of his GoldBod licence by failing to adopt what the prosecution describes as ethical and professional business standards and booking directives.
The second count is providing false information, contrary to Section 63(1)(b) and (2) of Act 1140.
The prosecution alleges that during July 2026 at Dunkwa-Offin, Okai-Woode provided false information relating to a gold transaction.
The two charges are therefore closely connected to the alleged 100-kilogramme booking and the representation that the gold was available for immediate delivery.
The Tier-2 System Under Scrutiny
Beyond the fate of the GH¢121.79 million, the case is likely to generate wider questions about the mechanisms through which money moves within Ghana’s formal gold-trading chain.
The complainant, Akatsi, is himself described in the prosecution documents as a Tier-2 licence holder.
The documents state that he receives funds through GoldBod’s aggregator, Bawa Rock, to purchase gold for supply.
The alleged transaction therefore did not occur entirely outside the regulated gold market. It involved participants operating within the licensed Tier-2 structure.
That aspect of the case is significant because the central question is not simply whether gold was delivered, but how funds intended for gold purchases are controlled, monitored and protected when one licensed dealer advances money to another dealer based on a booking or promise of delivery.
The case also raises questions about the level of due diligence required before large sums are released against representations that gold is already available.
In this particular transaction, the difference between the amount reportedly paid and the value of gold actually delivered is substantial.
Akatsi allegedly advanced GH¢121,790,725.00, while the gold supplied on 8 July 2026 was valued at GH¢5,551,817.00.
That leaves a difference of approximately GH¢116.24 million between the total amount advanced and the value of the gold reportedly delivered.
The prosecution’s account suggests that the outstanding amount became the subject of dispute after Okai-Woode allegedly failed to supply the remaining gold.
A Regulatory Test For Goldbod
The case comes at a time when GoldBod is seeking to impose greater structure, accountability and discipline on Ghana’s gold-trading industry.
The Board’s July 24 compliance notice is significant because it demonstrates that regulatory sanctions can follow alleged breaches by licensed operators.
GoldBod has stated that it remains committed to enforcing the laws, licence conditions and trading directives governing the gold sector and will take decisive action against individuals and companies whose conduct undermines the integrity and transparency of the industry.
The suspension of McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise therefore represents more than an administrative action against one dealer. It is also a test of how effectively the new regulatory architecture can respond when large sums move through the licensed gold market but the underlying gold transaction allegedly breaks down.
The Bigger Question
At the heart of the case is a deceptively simple question: How did GH¢121.79 million advanced for 100 kilogrammes of gold end up in a transaction where only 3.86504 kilogrammes were delivered?
The prosecution says Okai-Woode represented that he had the full quantity available, received the money and subsequently failed to supply the gold as promised.
It further alleges that, during investigations, he admitted using the money to settle debts while waiting for money allegedly owed to him by Dominic Bonsu Ventures.
GoldBod subsequently determined that the conduct breached the conditions attached to his licence and suspended McWoode Ray 24 Enterprise from gold trading.
But the criminal proceedings will ultimately have to determine whether the allegations against Okai-Woode meet the required legal threshold.
For GoldBod, however, the case has already become a regulatory matter.
For dealers operating within the Tier-2 system, it is a warning about the consequences of failing to comply with booking requirements and licence conditions.
And for the wider gold industry, the GH¢121.79 million dispute raises a much broader concern: whether Ghana’s new formalised gold-trading system has sufficient safeguards to ensure that money advanced for gold purchases is actually converted into gold, rather than being diverted into unrelated financial obligations.
Until the outstanding issues are resolved and the court determines the criminal charges, the fate of the alleged GH¢121.79 million gold deal remains one of the more consequential tests of accountability within the evolving gold-trading regime.
