Accra Main Daily, Watson Road, Accra (2026)

18/04/2026

THE PRESIDENT’S BROTHER AND THE MINE: NDC’s Damang Deal Is the SSNIT Scandal They Fought Against

An Op-Ed

Ghana has a short memory. Or perhaps, more accurately, Ghana’s political class hopes we do.

On Saturday, April 18, 2026 — today — the Government of Ghana officially handed over the Damang Mine lease to Engineers & Planners Ltd (E&P), a company founded and led by Ibrahim Mahama, younger brother of President John Dramani Mahama. The transition marks a significant shift in the management of one of Ghana’s major gold-producing assets, following a competitive bidding process supervised by the Minerals Commission after the expiration of the lease previously held by Gold Fields Ghana Limited(Graphic Online). Ibrahim Mahama stood before cheering crowds and declared, “I just want to prove that we can invest in ourselves in this country.”

It was stirring theatre. But Ghanaians who were paying attention less than two years ago know they have seen this exact play before — just with different actors, and a very different reaction from the NDC.

The SSNIT Hotels: A Precedent NDC Set in Stone

Cast your mind back to mid-2024. The Social Security and National Insurance Trust was in the process of selling a 60% stake in four of its flagship hotels — Labadi Beach Hotel, La Palm Royal Beach Hotel, Elmina Beach Resort, and Ridge Royal Hotel. The winning bidder was Rock City Hotel Limited, owned by Bryan Acheampong, then Ghana’s Minister for Food and Agriculture and NPP Member of Parliament for Abetifi.(MyJoyOnline)

The NDC went to war. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, MP for North Tongu, filed a petition with the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), arguing that the sale constituted a clear conflict of interest situation.(Modern Ghana) He organized street protests. Organized Labour — the TUC, Public Sector Workers, and Ghana Federation of Labour — threatened a nationwide strike. The chorus was unified and deafening: a sitting minister of state cannot use his proximity to power to acquire state assets. It is constitutionally wrong. It is morally offensive. It is a betrayal of the public trust.

The pressure worked. Rock City Hotel withdrew its bid in July 2024, citing the negativity surrounding the transaction as injurious to its brand.(Ghanaweb) NDC celebrated it as a victory for probity and accountability. Ablakwa was hailed as a champion of the people.

Now fast-forward eighteen months.

The Damang Mirror

Engineers and Planners Ltd is a wholly Ghanaian-owned mining and construction firm founded by Ibrahim Mahama, younger brother of President John Dramani Mahama, who returned to power in January 2025. (Billionaires.Africa)The company has served as Damang’s primary mining contractor for years, giving it detailed knowledge of the mine’s geological conditions, production systems, and workforce. That insider advantage is real and cannot be dismissed simply because a tender committee approved the bid.

The transaction carries political dimensions that have drawn scrutiny. Policy analyst Bright Simons of IMANI Africa raised concerns about political influence in the process in April 2025 — concerns serious enough that Engineers and Planners filed a defamation suit against him at an Accra High Court, a case that remains ongoing.(Billionaires.Africa)

The NDC’s defense sounds eerily familiar. When Acheampong was under fire, NPP’s Richard Ahiagbah argued that the process to offload SSNIT’s interests in the hotels began in 2018, five years before Acheampong assumed his ministerial role.(Peace FM) Now, the NDC similarly argues that E&P’s formal pursuit of the Damang asset predates the current administration by more than two years, with concrete steps traceable to September 2023.(Billionaires.Africa) Both parties used the same defense: the process started before our man was powerful. Both defenses are equally unconvincing to an objective observer.

The Constitution of Ghana does not make allowances for when a conflict of interest began to ripen. It is concerned with the state of affairs at the moment of consummation. And at the moment the Damang lease was handed over, Ibrahim Mahama is the brother of the sitting President of the Republic.

The Principle Must Be Consistent or It Is Worthless

To be fair, there are distinctions. Bryan Acheampong was himself a cabinet minister — a direct arm of the executive — seeking to buy assets from a state institution under government oversight. Ibrahim Mahama holds no government office. E&P’s proposal was the only one that fully satisfied the rigorous financial requirements, specifically demonstrating evidence of access to financing meeting the USD 500 million minimum threshold.(MyJoyOnline) These are not trivial differences, and intellectual honesty demands we acknowledge them.

But the spirit of the NDC’s 2024 argument was never purely about ministerial titles. Anti-corruption advocates pointed out that Acheampong, as a minister, was a politically exposed person who could have used his position to influence a state board.(MyJoyOnline) By the same logic, being the President’s brother — in a country where presidential authority permeates institutions from the Minerals Commission to state security — renders one politically exposed enough to warrant extraordinary scrutiny and, arguably, disqualification from bidding on major state assets during a sibling’s administration.

Ablakwa himself, to his credit, foreshadowed this trap when he said in 2024: “This will be my position even if the person is a member of my party.” (Modern Ghana) Let him be tested on that promise. Let every NDC parliamentarian who marched against Acheampong now march with equal vigor against this transaction. Silence now would be the most devastating confession that their 2024 crusade was politics, not principle.

A Warning to the NDC

Ghana’s democratic dysfunction feeds on this cycle: Party A does something outrageous; Party B screams from the rooftops; Party B wins power and does the same thing with different names attached. Voters, exhausted and cynical, eventually stop bothering.

If the NDC allows the Damang deal to stand without the same rigorous scrutiny they applied to the SSNIT hotels, they are writing a permission slip for every future government to do worse. And when the NPP returns to power — as it inevitably will, given Ghana’s near-clockwork alternation — they will cite the Damang precedent chapter and verse. They will hand a mine, a port, a bank, or a broadcasting license to the brother, cousin, or school mate of whoever sits in Jubilee House, and they will dare the NDC to say a word.

The NDC should not cry on that day. They will have authored the script.

What Good Governance Demands

What Ghana needs is not partisan outrage calibrated to electoral calendars. It needs a firm, cross-party consensus: no close relative of a sitting president or minister shall be awarded major state concessions during that administration’s tenure, regardless of competitive processes. Competitive tenders are not a sufficient shield when the playing field is tilted by proximity to executive power, institutional familiarity, and the unofficial weight of a presidential surname.

Parliament should legislate this clearly. CHRAJ should be empowered to enforce it proactively. And civil society — which roared in 2024 — must roar with equal force in 2026, regardless of which party governs.

Ibrahim Mahama may well be the most capable person in Ghana to run Damang Mine. He may build the airport he promised. The hospitals. The roads. He may prove that Ghanaians can manage their own resources. One genuinely hopes so. But the legitimacy of a transaction is separate from its outcomes. And this transaction, as structured and awarded, fails the basic test of conflict-of-interest integrity that the NDC itself established as the gold standard barely twenty-four months ago.

Ghana deserves better than a country where accountability is a weapon wielded only against opponents. It deserves principles that outlast election cycles.

Hold the NDC to theirs.

This op-ed reflects the views of the author and is intended to contribute to public discourse on governance and accountability in Ghana.

28/01/2026

The North–South Ticket Is Holding Ghana’s Democracy Hostage

Ghana’s democracy is often praised for its stability, but stability should not be confused with stagnation. One of the quietest yet most damaging forms of stagnation in our politics is the entrenched North–South alliance between presidential and vice-presidential candidates. What began as a political convenience has hardened into an unwritten rule that now undermines merit, competitiveness, and democratic choice.

This arrangement is not constitutional. No law mandates it. Yet political parties treat it as sacred doctrine. Geography has become a gatekeeper to the vice presidency, crowding out competence and reducing leadership selection to electoral mathematics. In a democracy, that should be unacceptable.

The North–South formula narrows the field before the race even begins. Talented leaders from several regions are never seriously considered—not because they lack ability, vision, or national appeal, but because they do not fit a tired balancing script. This is not inclusion; it is elite bargaining disguised as national unity.

Worse still, the convention reinforces political inequality. While the same regions are repeatedly positioned as “natural” partners for executive power, others are consigned to perpetual waiting rooms. Over time, this sends a corrosive message: some regions exist to rule, others merely to vote. That logic erodes national cohesion rather than strengthens it.

Defenders argue that the North–South alliance preserves stability. But stability built on exclusion is brittle. It relies on fear—fear that voters cannot rise above identity, fear that merit alone cannot win elections, fear that democracy must be managed rather than trusted. A confident democracy does not hedge its leadership choices with ethnic or regional insurance policies.

Ghana has changed, but its political habits have not. The electorate is more urban, more informed, and more issue-driven than in the past. Yet political parties continue to behave as though regional identity is destiny. This underestimates voters and insults the democratic progress the country claims to have made.

If Ghana is serious about democratic deepening, the vice presidency must be opened up. A deliberate rotation of the vice presidency among all regions—carefully designed and competence-driven—would break the monopoly of outdated conventions, expand leadership recruitment nationwide, and force political parties to compete on quality rather than calculation.

This is not a call to abandon merit. It is a call to stop using geography as a substitute for it. Merit cannot flourish where access is pre-restricted by informal rules.

Political conventions are tools, not truths. When they begin to limit choice, shield mediocrity, and freeze political imagination, they cease to serve democracy. The automatic North–South alliance has reached that point.

Ghana’s democracy will not be strengthened by repeating what feels safe. It will be strengthened by trusting its citizens, opening its leadership space, and rejecting political formulas that belong to another era.

The future of Ghanaian democracy demands courage—not comfort.

25/01/2026

Hausa Is Not Indigenous to Ghana: Why Ga-Dangme Must Be Included in the AI Language Pilot

As Ghana positions itself to participate in the global artificial intelligence (AI) revolution, the choices we make today about language inclusion will shape not only technological access, but also cultural preservation and national identity. It is therefore deeply concerning that Hausa has reportedly been included in Ghana’s AI language pilot while indigenous Ghanaian languages such as Ga-Dangme remain excluded.

Hausa, while widely spoken across West Africa, is not an indigenous language of Ghana. Its presence in the country is largely the result of historical trade, migration, and religion. There is no doubt that Hausa plays an important role as a regional lingua franca, particularly in commerce and among migrant communities. However, national AI language policy should not prioritize convenience or population spread over indigeneity, cultural heritage, and constitutional recognition.

Ghana is home to several indigenous language groups that are already marginalized in formal education, digital spaces, and public policy. Ga-Dangme, spoken by the original inhabitants of Accra and surrounding coastal areas, is one such language. Excluding Ga-Dangme from an AI pilot—especially while including a non-indigenous language—sends a troubling message: that some Ghanaian cultures are more expendable than others in the digital future.

Artificial intelligence is not neutral. The languages we train AI systems on determine who is visible, who is heard, and who benefits from technological advancement. If AI tools used in education, public services, and governance do not understand or reflect indigenous Ghanaian languages, then entire communities risk being left behind. This undermines Ghana’s stated commitment to inclusion, equity, and cultural preservation.

Education Minister Haruna Iddrisu has an opportunity—and a responsibility—to correct this imbalance. Removing Hausa from the AI pilot and replacing it with Ga-Dangme would be a principled and forward-looking decision. It would affirm that Ghana’s digital transformation must be rooted in its own cultural and linguistic realities, not imported hierarchies or regional dominance.

This is not an argument against Hausa or its speakers. Rather, it is an argument for clear policy criteria. AI language pilots funded or endorsed by the Ghanaian state should prioritize:

Indigenous Ghanaian languages

Languages with historical ties to Ghanaian identity and land

Languages that are underrepresented in digital and technological spaces

By these measures, Ga-Dangme more than qualifies.

If Ghana fails to embed its indigenous languages into emerging technologies now, it risks repeating the mistakes of the past—where development came at the cost of cultural erosion. AI should be a tool for empowerment, not erasure.

The future of Ghana’s education and technology systems must speak Ghanaian languages—starting with those that have too long been ignored.

12/01/2026

When Identification Becomes a Privilege: Why the Cost of the Ghana Card Is Unjust

A state that claims to serve its people cannot, in good conscience, price citizenship beyond their reach. Yet this is exactly what Ghana risks doing by charging GH₵400 for a National Identification Card in a country where per capita monthly income stands at about GH₵2,280.

Eighteen percent of a person’s monthly income for a single document is not a fee—it is a barrier. For millions of Ghanaians living on tight budgets, this amount competes directly with food, rent, transport, school fees, and healthcare. When identification becomes this expensive, it stops being a public service and becomes a privilege reserved for those who can afford it.

What makes the situation even more indefensible is that the same GH₵400 is charged for replacement, regardless of circumstances. Whether a card is damaged, lost through no fault of the holder, or rendered unusable by administrative failures, citizens are forced to pay again. This approach punishes ordinary people for systemic shortcomings and shifts institutional costs onto the poor.

The Ghana Card is not optional. It is now required to access banking services, register SIM cards, obtain employment, receive social protection, and participate fully in civic life. To attach such a high price to an essential document is to effectively tell low-income citizens that their participation in national life is conditional on their ability to pay.

Across the world, national identification systems are treated as public goods, because governments understand that inclusion strengthens the state. Accurate population data improves planning, enhances security, broadens the tax base, and enables efficient service delivery. Ghana gains far more from an inclusive identification system than it ever could from fees that exclude a significant portion of its population.

A government committed to equity must act decisively. First-time issuance of the Ghana Card should be free or fully subsidized. Replacement fees must be minimal, fair, and income-sensitive, not a flat charge that ignores economic realities. At the very least, the cost of essential documents such as National ID cards and birth certificates should never exceed 5 percent of the average monthly per capita income.

This is not a call for charity. It is a demand for justice. When access to identity is restricted by cost, inequality deepens and social trust erodes. A nation cannot speak of inclusive development while erecting financial barriers to citizenship itself.

Government exists to serve the people—not to burden them. The cost of being Ghanaian should never be GH₵400. It is time for policymakers to listen, rethink, and act in the true interest of the people they serve.

10/01/2026

Why Building Housing for Security Personnel Is a Strategic Mistake

Governments often justify building fenced or isolated housing for security personnel as a welfare measure—safe, affordable, and convenient. While well-intentioned, this approach is fundamentally flawed. Housing security professionals in segregated enclaves weakens, rather than strengthens, national security. True security is not built behind fences; it is built through integration, trust, and everyday proximity to the communities security personnel are meant to protect.

Isolation Undermines Intelligence

Security work depends heavily on human intelligence—local knowledge, informal conversations, community sentiment, and early warning signals. When security personnel live apart from society in guarded housing estates, they lose daily exposure to the rhythms of civilian life. They stop hearing the rumors in local shops, sensing tensions in neighborhoods, or building relationships that often yield critical intelligence long before formal reports do.

A security officer who lives among civilians is not just a resident; they are a listener, observer, and trusted neighbor. This organic flow of information cannot be replicated by surveillance technology or periodic patrols. Physical separation creates informational blindness.

Segregated Housing Creates a “Us vs. Them” Divide

Fenced housing reinforces social distance between security professionals and civilians. Over time, this separation breeds mistrust. Civilians may view security forces as outsiders or an occupying presence rather than partners in public safety. Meanwhile, security personnel may begin to see the public as a risk rather than a community.

This psychological divide is dangerous. Effective security institutions rely on public cooperation. When communities feel ownership of their own safety, they share information willingly and comply with lawful directives. Segregation erodes this social contract.

Integration Enhances Professional Effectiveness

Security personnel are citizens first. Living normal civilian lives—shopping locally, attending community events, sending children to neighborhood schools—keeps them grounded in the realities of the people they serve. It sharpens empathy, improves judgment, and reduces the likelihood of excessive force or alienation.

Integration also improves morale. Being confined to security-only housing can feel institutional, restrictive, and stigmatizing. Choice, autonomy, and dignity matter. Treating security personnel as capable professionals who can live responsibly within society reinforces pride and accountability.

Better Alternatives Exist

Instead of building housing complexes, governments should provide:

*Rent assistance or housing allowances that allow personnel to choose where they live

*Home-buying subsidies or low-interest mortgages to promote long-term stability

*Geographic flexibility incentives to ensure even distribution across communities

These measures achieve affordability without segregation. They also stimulate local economies rather than locking public funds into costly, often poorly maintained housing estates.

Security Is Strongest When It Is Invisible

The most effective security presence is not always uniformed or fenced off—it is embedded, observant, and trusted. When security professionals blend into communities, they become part of the social fabric. Threats are noticed earlier, tensions are defused quietly, and cooperation becomes natural.

Housing security personnel behind fences may feel safer on paper, but in practice it weakens intelligence networks, damages civil-military relations, and undermines long-term security goals.

If governments are serious about safety, they must stop thinking of security as something separate from society. Real security lives next door.

03/01/2026

Bootlicking, Sycophancy, and the Crisis of Leadership Renewal in Africa

By elevating individuals above institutions, African politics has repeatedly undermined its own future. Nowhere is this more evident than in the persistent culture of bootlicking and sycophancy that surrounds political leadership across the continent. This dangerous phenomenon continues to weaken democratic growth, destroy legacy-building, and block the generational transfer of power and knowledge.

In this context, the stance taken by Fifi Kwetey, General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), deserves recognition. His fortitude and foresight in resisting calls for a third-term agenda for President John Dramani Mahama reflect a commitment to institutional integrity over personal ambition. Unfortunately, those pushing such an agenda exemplify the very culture that has stalled political progress in Africa.

Bootlicking and sycophancy are not harmless acts of loyalty; they are corrosive behaviors that hollow out political systems. When party faithful and citizens elevate leaders to untouchable status, they weaken internal democracy and silence critical thinking. This blind allegiance discourages honest feedback, suppresses merit-based leadership development, and creates an environment where longevity in power becomes more important than competence, vision, or legacy.

Across Africa, this culture has produced a troubling pattern: leaders remain in power far beyond their most productive years, while younger generations are denied the opportunity to learn, lead, and innovate. Instead of nurturing successors, political spaces become personalized empires. The result is a vacuum—one where institutional memory is distorted, leadership pipelines collapse, and nations struggle to adapt to new realities.

History has shown that no individual is bigger than an organization, a political party, a nation, or even a family. Sustainable progress is built on strong institutions, not on personality cults. True leadership is measured not by how long one stays in power, but by how well one prepares others to take over and improve upon existing foundations.

If Africa is to move forward, bootlicking and sycophancy must be deliberately curtailed. Political parties must encourage internal democracy, principled dissent, and generational renewal. Citizens must learn to value systems over personalities, ideas over individuals, and accountability over blind loyalty.

Leadership is a relay, not a lifetime entitlement. Until African societies fully embrace this truth, the cycle of stagnation will persist. The future depends on our willingness to break free from the culture of sycophancy and build institutions that outlive individuals.

26/12/2025

Humility Is Not a Leadership Metric—Results Are

Africans are often told to look for “humble” leaders. Humility is praised as if it is proof of wisdom, discipline, and service. But humility—while personally admirable—is not a leadership metric. It is not a policy. It is not a plan. It does not build roads, improve schools, stabilize currencies, or create jobs.

Public leadership is not a personality contest. It is a performance contract.

The problem with using humility as a yardstick is that it is easy to perform. A politician can speak softly, dress simply, and posture as “one of the people,” while governing incompetently and escaping scrutiny. Over time, this cultural habit has helped normalize low expectations: citizens become emotionally satisfied by modest language while being materially harmed by poor outcomes.

That is how mediocrity survives.

Results are harder to fake. Results can be measured. They show up in service delivery, institutional strength, economic opportunity, security, and the fairness of the system. And when results are missing, leadership has failed—no matter how humble the speeches are.

If Africa wants better governance, we must shift our political evaluation from symbolism to outcomes:

What did you promise, and what did you deliver?

What institutions did you strengthen?

Did you reduce corruption or simply manage headlines?

Did citizens’ lives improve—or did your personal network expand?

Humility can be a good trait in a competent leader. But competence without results is still failure. And humility without accountability is often just a mask.

Africa does not need more “humble” politicians.
Africa needs leaders who deliver.

25/12/2025

Gold Exports Can’t Be Ghana’s Only Gold Standard: Why GoldBod Must Add Environmental Sustainability to the Fight Against Galamsey

Ghana deserves credit where it’s due: the push to formalize the gold value chain is producing visible results. Recent public reporting indicates that GoldBod has surpassed its 2025 small-scale gold export target—bringing in over $10 billion in foreign exchange. (MyJoyOnline) Earlier in the year, GoldBod/PMMC also reported over $8 billion in small-scale gold export earnings between January and mid-October 2025, a figure echoed by Reuters in the context of Ghana’s reserve rebuild. (Ghana Gold Board)

That matters. Formal export channels, tighter oversight, and reduced smuggling are essential if Ghana is to capture fair value from its mineral wealth.

But there is a hard truth we cannot keep postponing: gold revenue is not the same thing as national gain when the environmental cost is ignored or treated as an afterthought. Galamsey has turned too many rivers into mud, destroyed farmlands, and left long-term liabilities that communities will pay for long after today’s export numbers are forgotten. Scientific work continues to document the heavy metal and turbidity pollution associated with illegal mining in Ghana’s water bodies, including contaminants such as mercury and arsenic, and levels that exceed permissible thresholds in affected areas. (Wiley Online Library)

So yes—celebrate export performance. But Ghana needs a second question alongside every export milestone:

What are we doing—systematically—to repair the environmental debt?

Galamsey is not a “security issue” alone. It’s a governance system failure.

For years, the anti-galamsey conversation has swung like a pendulum: crackdowns, task forces, political declarations, and periodic enforcement surges. Some of these efforts disrupt operations temporarily. But the problem adapts because it is not only about lawbreaking; it’s about incentives—money, access, weak enforcement, and a value chain that can still absorb dirty gold.

That is why fighting galamsey must be integrated. Not integrated in speeches, but integrated in structure: enforcement, licensing, community alternatives, transparent traceability—and critically, environmental mitigation and restoration treated as a core pillar, not a side project.

Reuters has reported that Ghana’s strategy includes reforms like an anti-smuggling task force and plans for a national traceability system and refined gold exports—steps that speak to improving oversight and legitimacy in the trade. (Reuters) Those initiatives are important. But traceability without visible environmental restoration can still feel like Ghana is simply becoming better at exporting while the land and water continue to bleed.

The missing piece: a dedicated Environmental Sustainability Division inside GoldBod

If GoldBod is going to sit at the center of Ghana’s gold trade—regulating and supervising large parts of the value chain—then environmental sustainability cannot remain “somebody else’s department.” GoldBod’s own materials describe a broad mandate over the gold value chain and compliance. (Ghana Gold Board) In practical terms, that positions GoldBod as one of the few institutions that can connect trade governance with environmental consequence in a measurable way.

Ghanaians should therefore press for GoldBod to create an Environmental Sustainability Division—not as a PR unit, but as a working, resourced division with public deliverables. Why?

Because it aligns responsibility with influence. If an institution can help generate and channel billions through gold exports, it should also help ensure that gold is not funding environmental collapse.

What should this division actually do?

Not everything needs to be reinvented. Ghana already has agencies with environmental mandates—the EPA, Forestry Commission, Water Resources Commission, Minerals Commission, MMDAs. The point isn’t duplication. The point is coordination, financing, transparency, and measurable remediation tied to the gold trade.

A GoldBod Environmental Sustainability Division could focus on four practical roles:

1) Make environmental compliance part of trade credibility.
If GoldBod is licensing, supervising, or working through aggregators and traders, it can require basic environmental compliance checks and red flags as part of due diligence—working with regulators, not replacing them. This does not “end galamsey” overnight, but it makes it harder for harmful supply chains to hide behind the formal economy.

2) Help fund reclamation as a standing obligation, not an occasional project.
The biggest reason reclamation fails is predictable: it’s underfunded, irregular, and politically timed. A sustainability division creates a consistent vehicle for restoration financing—so clean-up is not dependent on the mood of the moment.

3) Publish public-facing environmental scorecards for mining-affected districts.
If citizens can see export numbers, they should also be able to see reclamation outcomes: river sections restored, degraded lands reclaimed, reforestation progress, and the status of high-risk zones. This is how you rebuild public trust—through evidence, not slogans.

4) Force an integrated national conversation: “gold value” must include environmental value.
Galamsey is a national emergency partly because it harms the environment, and partly because it breaks confidence that the state is protecting the environment. Institutions regain legitimacy when they demonstrate seriousness about the public interest.

The core principle: you can’t count forex while ignoring ecological bankruptcy

Ghana’s environmental crisis is not “separate” from economic strategy. When rivers are polluted, water treatment costs rise. When farmland is destroyed, food systems weaken. When forests are degraded, climate vulnerability increases. When public health suffers, productivity falls. In other words, environmental damage quietly becomes a long-term tax on development.

That is why export success alone cannot be the headline. We should treat it as one side of the balance sheet. The other side is the environmental liability—still accumulating in too many communities.

So this is the appeal to GoldBod—and to government more broadly:

Keep improving the gold trade. Keep formalizing. Keep curbing smuggling.
But if Ghana wants to call this a national win, then GoldBod must also help lead a credible environmental response—structurally, financially, and transparently.

Because a nation is not wealthy when it exports billions and inherits poisoned rivers.

A truly integrated fight against galamsey means Ghana defends both: the value of its gold, and the value of its land, water, and future.

And in that national equation, an Environmental Sustainability Division within GoldBod is not an extra. It’s overdue.

Accra Main Daily

18/04/2026

28/01/2026

25/01/2026

12/01/2026

10/01/2026

03/01/2026

26/12/2025

25/12/2025

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share

Category