Ghana's Minority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, confirmed that the opposition's concerns about a reported GHS 22 billion loss linked to the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) are not politically motivated. He made these remarks at a press conference in Parliament on Tuesday, August 18, 2026. Mr. Afenyo-Markin defended the Minority’s position on the financial implications of GoldBod’s domestic gold purchasing operations.
The Minority Leader explained that these substantial figures originated from an International Monetary Fund (IMF) report on Ghana. The IMF identified losses of about US$1.7 billion, which translates to approximately GHS 22 billion, from the domestic gold purchasing programme in 2025. This significant financial shortfall has prompted calls for greater transparency and accountability regarding public funds.
This situation fits into a broader narrative of public finance scrutiny in Ghana, especially concerning state-owned enterprises and their financial performance. Ghana has been working with the IMF on an Extended Credit Facility, making the findings of such reports particularly relevant to the nation's economic stability. Previous instances of financial irregularities or inefficiencies in public sector entities have often led to public outcry and demands for reform. The reported GHS 22 billion loss represents a substantial sum, impacting the national budget and potentially affecting other critical development expenditures.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin attributed the losses to several factors identified by the IMF. These include service and assay fees, discounts on gold sold to off-takers, and exchange-rate differences. The exchange-rate differences arose between the rates used to purchase gold and the reference rate used by the Bank of Ghana for accounting purposes. He argued that these losses demand public scrutiny, especially since GoldBod plays a central role in buying, aggregating, assaying, and exporting gold, while the Bank of Ghana provides the necessary financing.
The Minority Leader questioned why GoldBod should receive fees from these transactions while the associated losses appear on the books of the Bank of Ghana. He stressed that the location of a loss in an institution’s accounts does not change its economic impact on the country. Mr. Afenyo-Markin called for answers on several key aspects. These include the prices paid for gold, how these prices were determined, the selection of off-takers, discounts applied to gold sales, and the fees earned by GoldBod. He highlighted the need for a clear understanding of the risk-sharing arrangement between GoldBod and the Bank of Ghana.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin argued that the institution carrying out the commercial activity should not benefit from transaction fees while another institution bears most of the financial risk. He affirmed that the Minority is not seeking to trade insults with GoldBod officials. Instead, their focus remains on holding institutions accountable for the management of public resources. He urged the government and GoldBod to address the concerns raised by the IMF. They must provide Ghanaians with clear explanations about the reported losses. The Minority will continue to scrutinise the programme because its financial consequences ultimately affect Ghanaian taxpayers. This ongoing scrutiny will likely keep GoldBod and the Bank of Ghana under pressure to provide detailed financial disclosures and justify their operational practices. Investors and international partners will also closely watch how Ghana addresses these significant financial concerns.