The Ghana Gold Board (GOLDBOD) faces fresh transparency concerns after a policy think tank alleged the removal of quarterly trading reports from its website. The Institute of Economic Research and Public Policy (IERPP) demands an explanation for the disappearance of these crucial financial documents.
IERPP stated that GOLDBOD must clarify why these reports are no longer publicly accessible. The institute highlighted Section 42 of the Ghana Gold Board Act, 2025 (Act 1140), which legally requires the board to publish quarterly reports. These reports cover operations, revenue, contracts, expenditure, and responsible sourcing.
This scrutiny comes as Ghana's economy navigates complex financial landscapes, with gold playing a vital role in foreign exchange earnings. The alleged removal of reports adds to existing public and parliamentary questions surrounding GOLDBOD's financial performance. It also raises concerns about its domestic gold-purchasing programme.
Professor Isaac Boadi, Executive Director of IERPP, emphasized that the institute is not accusing GOLDBOD of wrongdoing. He stated, “Section 42(2) requires GOLDBOD to ensure access to those reports. The law does not merely require GoldBod to upload reports; it requires meaningful public access to them.” This statement underscores the legal obligation for continuous public access.
The implications of this lack of transparency are significant for public finance and market confidence. Without clear, accessible reports, independent scrutiny of GOLDBOD's activities becomes difficult. This situation could affect Ghana's foreign exchange earnings, gold exports, and the central bank's reserves. Decision-makers and markets will closely watch GOLDBOD's response to these demands.
IERPP has made six specific demands to GOLDBOD. First, it calls for the immediate restoration of all previously published quarterly reports. Second, the institute wants GOLDBOD to establish a permanent public archive for these documents. Third, it demands explanations for any deletion, withdrawal, amendment, or replacement of reports. This includes publication and removal dates for each document.
Fourth, IERPP insists that information required under Section 42 must remain publicly accessible. This includes details on revenue, contracts, expenditure, operations, and gold traceability. Fifth, the institute seeks disclosure of off-taker fees, trading margins, discounts, and assay charges. These transaction costs are vital for independent financial analysis.
Finally, IERPP argues that GOLDBOD should lead by example in transparency. It stated, “Public gold requires public scrutiny. Public money requires public accountability.” The institute warned against GOLDBOD becoming a “black box.” It stressed that the board’s activities directly impact Ghana’s economic stability and financial integrity. The timing of these concerns is particularly important amid growing questions about the financial relationship between GOLDBOD, the Bank of Ghana, and Ghana’s domestic gold-purchasing programme. The institute believes Section 42 was specifically enacted to promote accountability, not just temporary compliance.