Recent calls by the Minority caucus for investigations and possible prosecutions over an alleged US$214 million loss involving the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod require careful examination grounded in facts, context, and institutional understanding. While accountability in public finance is indispensable, it must not be pursued through mischaracterization of complex policy decisions or selective interpretation of financial data.
The amount being described as a loss does not represent missing funds, theft, or criminal diversion. Rather, it reflects accounting exposure associated with structured gold backed transactions undertaken during a period of significant economic stress. These were institutional policy choices executed within approved state frameworks to stabilize the economy, not private dealings for personal enrichment. Presenting such exposure as evidence of wrongdoing risks misleading the public and undermining confidence in public institutions.
It is also important to apply consistent standards of scrutiny. When the Minority previously held office, several gold-linked initiatives were implemented, including the Gold for Reserves and Gold for Oil programmes. What independently audited evidence exists to show how much physical gold was added to national reserves under those programmes? What lasting foreign exchange stability did they achieve? How many barrels of oil were sustainably secured, and why were comprehensive parliamentary reports detailing volumes, pricing, and settlements not made available to the public? These questions remain largely unanswered.
Beyond specific programmes lies the broader record of economic management. Ghana’s most severe macroeconomic challenges, including unprecedented cedi depreciation, record inflation, and excessive borrowing that culminated in an IMF programme, occurred before the current leadership of the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod. It is, therefore, misleading to suggest that these institutions or their current heads presided over the very conditions they were later tasked to correct.
The timing of the present outrage is also noteworthy. Today, the economy is showing signs of stabilization, with improved currency performance and reduced reliance on international borrowing and domestic bond issuance. These developments point to stronger fiscal discipline and more efficient resource mobilization. Yet this progress is conspicuously absent from the Minority’s narrative, which focuses instead on politicizing policy exposure.
Heavy reliance on IMF reports further illustrates this selective approach. IMF assessments are advisory in nature and often cautionary, particularly when fiscal years have not ended and accounts remain open for reconciliation and audit. Such observations are not final verdicts and should not be treated as proof of mismanagement or criminality. Policy disagreement or institutional caution does not amount to wrongdoing.
Understanding the role of GoldBod is also essential. GoldBod is not a conventional profit-making entity. Its mandate is to sanitize the gold trade, reduce smuggling, improve foreign exchange inflows, and strengthen macroeconomic stability. Its operations naturally involve advance purchases, price fluctuations, settlement timelines, and hedging risks that are standard features of commodity backed systems worldwide. Any fair assessment must therefore consider broader outcomes such as reduced smuggling and improved reserve management rather than isolating figures without context.
Accountability remains a cornerstone of good governance, and where wrongdoing is established through proper audits and due process, the law must take its course. However, reforms should not be criminalized simply because they challenge old models or begin to yield results. Persistent politicization of institutional decisions risks undermining investor confidence, weakening Ghana’s international credibility, and slowing national recovery.
Ghanaians deserve a balanced and honest conversation rooted in facts, consistency, and national interest rather than selective outrage and political theatrics.
By Curtice Dumevor -Public Health Expert and Social Analyst
