The Chairperson of Parliament’s Economy Committee, Eric Afful, has rejected claims that Ghana has incurred a $214m loss under the Gold-for-Reserves (G4R) programme, saying the amount should be viewed as a transactional cost rather than a financial loss.
His comments follow growing criticism from the Minority in Parliament, which has raised concerns over the management and transparency of the initiative and is calling for a bipartisan investigation.
Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsnight on Monday, 29 December, Mr Afful said the figure being cited could not be accurately described as a loss because the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) has not yet published its financial statements.
“GoldBod has not rendered its financials,” he said. “Though there was information going to the IMF that there is about $240m, I am saying with confidence that this amount cannot, as we speak today, be described as losses. It is a cost. It is a transactional cost to the Gold Board.”
The Gold-for-Reserves programme was introduced to strengthen Ghana’s foreign exchange position by using locally sourced gold to build reserves and support currency stability. However, the initiative has come under increasing scrutiny amid claims of possible financial mismanagement.
The Minority caucus has called for the establishment of a parliamentary ad hoc committee to investigate the programme. Addressing journalists, the Member of Parliament for Ofoase Ayirebi, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, said the committee should be granted powers to subpoena all contracts, licences and intermediaries involved in the G4R transactions.
He also called on the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod to publish detailed information on fee structures, pricing formulas, aggregator selection processes and foreign exchange arrangements linked to the programme.
Mr Oppong Nkrumah further raised environmental and governance concerns, questioning the sourcing of gold from forest reserves. He urged authorities to suspend permits in such areas and to introduce stricter traceability mechanisms to ensure compliance with environmental laws.
According to the Minority, a comprehensive inquiry is necessary to guarantee transparency and accountability, and to ensure that public funds are not indirectly supporting illegal mining activities, commonly referred to as galamsey.
Responding to the calls for investigation, Mr Afful maintained that conclusions should not be drawn prematurely. He argued that transactional costs are inherent in large-scale commodity and reserve management programmes and should not be conflated with losses.
He stressed the need for due process, adding that a clearer picture would emerge once GoldBod publishes its audited financial accounts.
The debate over the Gold-for-Reserves programme reflects wider concerns about economic governance and oversight, as Parliament continues to examine the effectiveness and integrity of measures aimed at stabilising Ghana’s economy.
As pressure mounts for greater disclosure, stakeholders are expected to await further clarification from the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod on the financial and operational details of the initiative.