SAMMY GYAMFI MUST ACCOUNT FOR THE GH¢22 BILLION LOSS – INSULTS CANNOT SUBSTITUTE FOR ANSWERS
The press conference addressed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), Mr. Sammy Gyamfi, on Wednesday, 19th August 2026, was expected to provide clear answers to the serious concerns raised by the Minority in Parliament regarding the reported GH¢22 billion loss associated with the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP).
Unfortunately, instead of providing a comprehensive account of how the loss occurred, the CEO devoted considerable attention to attacking the Minority Leader, the Minority Caucus and other Members of Parliament. That is not accountability.
The Minority’s concerns were not based on speculation, social media commentary or political conjecture. They were grounded in the findings contained in the IMF’s latest Country Report on Ghana, which identified substantial losses associated with the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.
The central question therefore remains straightforward: How did Ghana incur a loss of approximately GH¢22 billion under the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme, and who bears responsibility for the financial consequences?
Mr. Gyamfi cannot answer that question by attacking the Minority Leader. He cannot answer it by questioning the motives of Members of Parliament.
And he certainly cannot answer it by turning the so-called Government Accountability Series into a platform for political invective.
Indeed, Mr. Gyamfi’s own position appears to have shifted. Having previously insisted publicly that no loss had occurred, his latest intervention acknowledges that there was indeed a financial loss associated with the programme, while seeking to place substantial responsibility on the Bank of Ghana.
If that is his position, then we welcome the clarification. But it raises an even more important question: If there was a loss, what precisely caused it? How much was attributable to each component of the programme? Which institution made the relevant decisions? What transactions occasioned the loss? And who ultimately bears responsibility? These are the questions that demand answers.
The IMF report is particularly instructive because it does not merely identify the financial impact of the programme.
It also calls for measures to eliminate risks to the Bank of Ghana’s balance sheet arising from the DGPP and notes the transfer of programme activities to GoldBod, with Government assuming the programme’s costs. That development makes parliamentary scrutiny even more necessary.
The decision by the Bank of Ghana to end its pre-financing arrangement for GoldBod’s domestic gold purchases from 1st July 2026 further demonstrates that the financial and monetary implications of the programme are real and deserving of serious institutional examination.
The Minority is therefore doing precisely what Parliament is constitutionally expected to do: asking questions, demanding accountability and protecting the public purse.
Mr. Sammy Gyamfi should understand that parliamentary oversight is not a personal attack on him. It is a constitutional responsibility.
The Minority Leader and Members of the Minority Caucus do not require the permission of the CEO of GoldBod before scrutinising the financial operations of a public institution.
They are accountable to the Ghanaian people and have every right, indeed, a duty, to demand answers on matters involving billions of cedis of public resources.
What is particularly troubling is the tone adopted by the CEO. President Mahama’s Code of Conduct for Ministers and other political appointees requires public officials to conduct themselves with integrity, professionalism, restraint and respect for the institutions of the Republic.
Public office is a position of trust, and holders of such offices are expected to uphold the dignity of the institutions they represent.
Mr. Gyamfi’s conduct at the press conference falls far short of that standard. A disagreement with parliamentary scrutiny does not confer a licence on a public official to insult, denigrate or attack the integrity of Parliament, its leadership or Members who are simply performing their constitutional oversight functions.
Sammy Gyamfi is entitled to disagree with the Minority. He is entitled to defend GoldBod. He is entitled to challenge the interpretation placed on the IMF report.
But he is not entitled to substitute insults for answers. If the Minority’s figures are wrong, let GoldBod publish the complete financial data and demonstrate precisely where the error lies.
If the GH¢22 billion figure is misleading, let Mr. Gyamfi provide the audited figures, methodology and reconciliation necessary to establish the correct figure.
If the Bank of Ghana bears the greater responsibility, let the relevant transactions, decisions and institutional responsibilities be placed before Parliament and the Ghanaian public.
That is how serious public institutions respond to serious allegations. They respond with evidence, transparency and facts, not insults.
It is also important to distinguish between the financial performance of GoldBod as an institution and the financial consequences of the broader Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.
This debate must not be reduced to a contest of personalities or political rhetoric. The issue is the financial architecture of the programme, the decisions taken under it, the losses incurred and, ultimately, the burden imposed on the Ghanaian taxpayer. The Ghanaian taxpayer does not care who wins a press conference.
The Ghanaian taxpayer wants to know where the money went, why the loss occurred, who made the decisions, and who will bear the cost.
Sammy Gyamfi may succeed in generating headlines with personal attacks, but he cannot divert public attention indefinitely from the substantive issue raised by the IMF and taken up by the Minority.
GH¢22 billion is not a political insult. It is public money. And public money must be accounted for.
I therefore urge the CEO of GoldBod to discontinue the politics of distraction and avail himself of the appropriate parliamentary processes to provide a full, transparent and evidence-based account of the operations of the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.
The Minority has asked legitimate questions. The answer is not an insult. The answer is an account Until those questions are satisfactorily answered, the matter must remain firmly on the national agenda. Ghanaians deserve nothing less.
Credit:Muhayu-Deen Esq
