Gold-for-Reserves used to be the brainchild of the NPP gov’t however Mahama expanded it ‘recklessly’ – Minority – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction

The Gold-for-Reserves programme has become a focal point of political and economic debate in Ghana. Initially conceived by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) government under President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the programme aimed to bolster the country’s foreign reserves and stabilize the economy. However, recent allegations from the Minority in Parliament have cast a shadow over its implementation under President John Mahama’s administration. Accusations of reckless expansion, mismanagement, and a staggering US$214 million loss have sparked national outrage and raised critical questions about financial governance and oversight.

Key Points

Background

The Genesis of Gold-for-Reserves

The Gold-for-Reserves programme was introduced in 2021 by the NPP government as a strategic initiative to diversify Ghana’s foreign reserves and reduce dependence on the US dollar. The programme involved the Bank of Ghana purchasing locally mined gold from small-scale and artisanal miners at competitive prices. This gold was then added to the country’s reserves, providing a hedge against currency fluctuations and improving economic stability.

NPP’s Implementation Strategy

Under the NPP administration, the programme was characterized by strict oversight, transparency, and accountability. Patricia Appiagyei, Deputy Minority Leader and MP for Asokwa, emphasized that the programme was managed with “discipline, transparency, and responsibility” during this period. She stated, “The programme as we designed and implemented it did not lose US$214 million in nine months.”

The Transition of Power

In December 2024, John Mahama was sworn in as President, marking the beginning of a new administration. The transition brought changes to the management and scope of the Gold-for-Reserves programme, leading to the current controversy.

Analysis

The IMF Report and Financial Losses

The controversy centers around a report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which documented losses of US$214 million within a nine-month period. This figure has become a rallying point for the Minority, who argue that it represents a significant failure in financial governance. The loss, equivalent to approximately GH¢2.6 billion, has been described as a “scandal” by Patricia Appiagyei.

Allegations of Reckless Expansion

The Minority accuses the Mahama administration of politicizing and recklessly expanding the Gold-for-Reserves programme. Appiagyei argued that the programme was placed in “unprepared and potentially conflicted hands,” leading to its deterioration. She questioned what changed after Mahama took office, implying that the previous administration’s careful management was replaced with negligence.

Denials and Counterclaims

GoldBod, the entity responsible for implementing the programme, and the Bank of Ghana have denied making any losses. In a statement issued on January 3, 2026, GoldBod emphatically rejected the allegations. The CEO of GoldBod claimed that the institution generated over GH¢960 million in revenue against GH¢120 million in expenditures, projecting a surplus of between GH¢700 million and GH¢800 million.

Credibility of Claims

Despite these denials, the Minority maintains that the statements do not address the core issues raised in the IMF report. Appiagyei insisted that the government must provide clarity on how a programme once managed without losses has allegedly deteriorated under the current administration. The discrepancy between the IMF’s findings and the claims of GoldBod and the Bank of Ghana remains a point of contention.

Political Implications

The controversy has significant political implications. It has intensified partisan divisions and fueled criticism of the Mahama administration’s economic management. The NPP has used the allegations to highlight what they perceive as mismanagement and lack of accountability, while the government has defended its actions and questioned the validity of the claims.

Practical Advice

For Policymakers

• Enhance Transparency: Implement robust reporting mechanisms to ensure all financial transactions are transparent and auditable.
• Independent Oversight: Establish independent oversight bodies to monitor the implementation of economic programmes.
• Stakeholder Engagement: Engage with all stakeholders, including miners, financial institutions, and international partners, to ensure the programme’s success.
• Risk Management: Develop comprehensive risk management strategies to mitigate potential financial losses.

For the Public

• Stay Informed: Follow credible news sources and official statements to stay informed about the developments in the Gold-for-Reserves controversy.
• Critical Thinking: Evaluate information critically and consider multiple perspectives before forming opinions.
• Civic Engagement: Participate in civic activities and hold elected officials accountable for their actions.
• Advocacy: Support initiatives that promote transparency, accountability, and good governance.

For Investors

• Risk Assessment: Assess the political and economic risks associated with investing in Ghana.
• Diversification: Diversify investment portfolios to mitigate potential risks.
• Monitoring: Monitor developments in the Gold-for-Reserves programme and its impact on the economy.
• Consultation: Seek advice from financial advisors and experts before making investment decisions.

FAQ

Conclusion

The Gold-for-Reserves controversy highlights the complexities of economic governance and the importance of transparency and accountability. While the programme was initially designed to strengthen Ghana’s economy, allegations of mismanagement and financial losses have cast a shadow over its implementation. The discrepancy between the IMF’s findings and the government’s claims underscores the need for independent oversight and thorough investigations.

As the debate continues, it is crucial for all stakeholders to prioritize the nation’s economic well-being over political interests. Robust oversight mechanisms, transparent reporting, and stakeholder engagement are essential to restore public confidence and ensure the success of economic initiatives. The lessons learned from this controversy can inform future policy decisions and contribute to more effective and accountable governance.