GoldBod ambiguities can undermine investor confidence

The Member of Parliament for Damongo Constituency and former Minister for Lands and Natural Resources, Samuel Abu Jinapor, has called on the government to provide clarity on the proposed Gold Board.
According to him, the concept raises more questions than answers, and further ambiguity could undermine investor confidence in the country’s mining sector.
The Gold Board is one of the National Democratic Congress (NDC)’s key manifesto promises aimed at regulating Ghana’s gold industry.
Despite being described as a crucial measure for economic revitalization, many industry players remain unclear on its specific roles and responsibilities.

Concerns over mandate and duplication of roles
Finance Minister Dr. Cassiel Ato Baah Forson inaugurated a technical committee in January 2025 to develop a framework for setting up the Gold Board.
Speaking at the event, Dr. Ato Forson emphasized that the Board would regulate the gold industry, stabilize the cedi, and maximize revenue from gold exports.
Similarly, President John Mahama, in his maiden State of the Nation Address, highlighted that the Board would ensure effective governance of the gold industry.
However, these broad statements have raised concerns among stakeholders, particularly regarding the Board’s function in relation to existing institutions.
In a statement posted on his Facebook page, Mr. Jinapor questioned the relevance of the Gold Board, given that agencies such as the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, the Minerals Commission, the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF), and the Bank of Ghana (BoG) already oversee the regulation, management, and utilization of gold resources.
“So now, what will be the mandate of this proposed Gold Board? How will it co-exist with the time-tested and cardinal institutions such as the Minerals Commission?” he queried.

Potential impact
A major concern raised by Mr. Jinapor is whether the government intends to strip the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources of its statutory functions in granting gold export licenses and reassign those responsibilities to the Gold Board.
Additionally, he noted that the Bank of Ghana (BoG) has played a significant role in the gold trade and questioned whether the Board’s establishment would disrupt this function.
His concerns are reinforced by a recent statement from the Governor of the BoG, who suggested that the Gold Board would take over the central bank’s Domestic Gold Purchase Programme upon its establishment.
This statement has fueled apprehensions that the Board may assume control over gold purchasing and exporting, thereby sidelining private sector actors who have invested in gold trade.

Need for clarity and industry engagement
Mr. Jinapor has urged the government to bring more transparency to the concept and avoid unnecessary duplication of roles among state institutions.
He warned against undermining well-established regulatory agencies, stating, “While it is welcoming to implement additional measures and/or interventions to have maximum benefit from our mineral resources, it is also important not to duplicate the mandate of institutions, which are already performing these functions.”
He emphasized that Ghana has developed a respected mining regulatory framework over the years, and any attempt to implement changes must be done in an open and transparent manner.
“Ghana has come far with her mining regulatory regime, which is highly respected across the globe. Nothing should be done in secrecy or surreptitiously to destroy Ghana’s hard-won reputation in this sector,” he cautioned.

Industry stakeholders await govt’s response
With these concerns now in the public domain, industry stakeholders are looking to the government for clear answers on the Gold Board’s structure, functions, and impact.
Many believe that a well-defined framework is necessary to ensure that the Board enhances Ghana’s mining industry rather than disrupts its progress.
Until then, calls for clarity and transparency are expected to intensify in the coming months.