Politics

The strategic vision of Dr. Bryan Acheampong (DBA) for the transformation of Ghana is anchored on three(3) pillars, namely:

1. D- Development in Freedom Policy

The first pillar of Bryan’s government would strictly be based on “Development in Freedom” across all sectors of the economy, especially in accordance with achieving the following:
1. Political Objectives of Ghana (Article 35 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

2. Economic Objectives of Ghana (Article 36 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

3. Social Objectives of Ghana (Article 37 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

4. Educational Objectives of Ghana (Article 38 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

5. Cultural Objectives of Ghana(Article 39 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

6. International Policy of Ghana (Article 40 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana).

7. All the provisions of one’s Fundamental Human Rights and Freedom as captured under Chapter Five(5) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana.

8. Article 1(1) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, that is, upholding and strictly complying with the Supremacy of the Constitution.

9. Sustainability of absolute Freedom and Independence of the Media as captured under Chapter Twelve (12) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana.

Freedom is the ultimate end goal of national development, and as such, the “Development in Freedom Policy” by Bryan Acheampong would take care of:
1. Economic and Financial Freedom

2. Political Freedom

3. Judicial Freedom

4. Media Freedom

5. Social Freedom

6. Intellectual/Academic/Professional Freedom

7. Freedom of Choice

8. Freedom of Speech

9. Freedom of Expression

10. Freedom of Association.

11. National Unity and Cohesion

12. Respect for Diversity dynamics, Equity, and Inclusion

The Development in Freedom Policy of Bryan Acheampong would successfully foster:
1. All-Inclusiveness without any form of discrimination.

2. Meritocracy as a benchmark for appointing public officials into government.

3. Solid collaboration with CSOs and think tanks for national development and public sector accountability.

4. Law and Order

5. Human Security, IoT Security, Cybersecurity, and Data Security

6. Operational & Territorial Security

7. Transparency and Fight against Corruption

2. B-Business Friendly Environment for the Private Sector & Investors

The second pillar of Bryan’s government would strictly and prudently ensure that there is:
1. Massive drive for Private Sector growth and development as enshrined in Article 36(2b & 2c) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana.

2. Tremendous promotion of Africapitalism in Ghana, as one of the strategies for accelerating job creation, wealth creation, as well as attracting Foreign Investors into Ghana.

3. Public-Private Partnerships at no cost to government institutions.

4. Infrastructural Development and National Beautification Programme(NBP) aimed at boosting tourism as well as achieving environmental sustainability in Ghana.

5. Inclusive growth and inclusive development across Ghana under the theme, *”No Region Left Behind Policy”* Proposed by Dr. Bryan Acheampong for a proper equitable national development across Ghana.

6. Prudent management of economic indicators such as Exchange Rate, Inflation, and Interest Rates aimed at creating the right enabling environment for the business community and investors.

3. A- Advance Economic Ecosystems of Ghana

The third pillar of Bryan’s government would focus on positioning Ghana as one of the economic giants of Africa competing fairly on the global market. This third objective would be achieved through:
1. A well-diversified economy aimed at addressing unemployment and low quality of well-being.

2. Massive investments into advanced technology leading to the creation of:
(a). Sustainable Digital Economic Revolution(SDER)

(b). Sustainable Food and Agricultural products(SFAP) aimed at achieving food security as well as boosting the export capacity of Ghana.

(c) Sustainable Energy Supply

(d). Environmental Sustainability(ES), addressing the menace of Galamsey.

(e). Sustainable Healthcare Delivery Systems across all the MMDAs in Ghana.

Ghana’s Bright Future is with Bryan.

Issued by:Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President of UP Tradition Institute

For lack of knowledge and accuracy of information, people indeed perish, and this is exactly how sabouters of KGL Technology Limited are seriously perishing with their unsustainable media agenda.

However, let me use this opportunity to further educate the unrepented sabouters about the operational mandate of NLA under Act 722 and L. I. 2008(1948) as follows:

Mandate of NLA
The section 2(Objects of National Lotto) and Section 4 of Act 722 are underpinning and operationalized by Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29,32, and 33 of the same Act 722 regulated by Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14,15, and 16 of Lottery Regulations, 2008(L. I. 1948).

The implications of the aforementioned sections of Act 722 and L.I. 1948 are that NLA does NOT directly have to sell lottery products to the staking public BUT through third-party companies such as Lotto Marketing Companies(LMCs via Kiosks & POSTs/TPMs, and Online LMCs, which KGL is a licensed Online Lotto Marketing company), Technical Service Providers, Collaborators, Telecos, and Suppliers. Bear in mind that, all the third-party companies are 100% Private entities.

As a matter of fact, the Provisional License of KGL Technology Limited was jointly signed by Kofi Osei-Ameyaw as the Director-General, and Togbe Francis Albert Seth Nyonyo as the Board Chairman of NLA.

The final license of KGL Technology Limited was signed by Togbe Francis Albert Seth Nyonyo as the Board Chairman, and Awuku as the Director-General of NLA.

Legal Backing of KGL- NLA Contract
There is absolutely NO legal violations, and absolutely NO state capture agenda by KGL that contravenes Act 722.

With the greatest of respect, the Solicitor-General representing the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice on the Board of NLA who was re-appointed by H.E. John Mahama would NEVER allowed such legal violations to occur in relations to KGL-NLA Contract.

The contract of KGL went through all the right processes of law, and proper scrutiny in accordance with Act 722, L. I. 1948 and other relevant laws of Ghana.

The current arrangement between NLA and KGL is 100% ethically right and 100% LEGALLY right under Act 722 and L. I. 1948.

Section 2(2) and Section 4(1) are strictly implemented using Sections 5(1), 6, 7, 8, & 9 of Act 722, and Sections 12, & 13 of L.I 1948. Also, Section 15 of Act 722 is implemented using Sections 16, 28, 9 & 10 of Act 722, supported by Sections 7, 12 and 13 of L. I. 1948.
Therefore, it is very myopic for anyone to conclude that Section 2(2), Section 15 and Section 5(1) are impediments to the licensing of Private entity like KGL Technology Limited by NLA to operate 5/90 lottery products via short code(USSD) and online space.

Furthermore:
1. KGL Technology Limited is selling National Lotto products empowered by Sections 12 of L. 1. 1948 fully supported by Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, and 20 of Act 722.

2. Sections 13, 14, and 16 of L. I. 1948 empowers KGL Technology Limited to collect proceeds of NLA without pre-finance nor logging such proceeds with NLA. This is rightfully so, because NLA does NOT pay any commission to KGL as stated under Section 28 of Act 722.

3. Sections 2(4), 25, & 26 of Act 722, and Section 13(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 11) of L. I. 1948 empowers KGL Technology Limited to pay winning tickets to the staking public.

Let’s me reiterate that, it is absolutely FALSE that in the absence of KGL Technology Limited:
1. NLA can generate GHS 6 billion annually in revenue.
2. Deliver over GHS 3 billion in gross profit, and
3. If properly optimized, can earn up to GHS 12 billion in revenue, and GHS 5 billion in profits annually for national development.
Even Ghana Revenue Authority(GRA) or Bank of Ghana(BoG) cannot even dream of such aforementioned figures, not to talk of games of chance or running of highly volatile industry like lottery whereby winning ratios can easily exceed revenue generated on daily basis leading to debts and deficit for the NLA. In fact, there is no historical data or current scientific data that supports the aforementioned figures quoted by people who are seriously ignorant and misinformed about the lottery industry in Ghana.

What Ghana and NLA Stands to Gain with the continuous existence of KGL Contractual agreement with NLA are as follows:
1. Generation of substantial amount of revenue to the State. Absolutely no public funds will be lost.

2. Create sustainability for the National Lottery Authority(NLA) as well as empowers NLA to strengthen its legal and regulatory authority especially in the digital space.

3. Ensure that NLA compete fairly and squarely against the illegal lottery operations in Ghana as well as empowers NLA to take the full dominance in the digital space.

4. Operate always in accordance with Act 722 and L. I. 1948, and never will KGL ever attempt any entrenchment of State capture at NLA.

5. Consistently deepen public confidence in democratic governance by assisting NLA to generate revenue in the digital space, pay winning tickets promptly on behalf of NLA, as well as commit to undertaking CSR activities in full alignment with Section 2(3) of Act 722.

The rants and demands by any group of people or sabouters against KGL in relation to cancellations of KGL Contract with NLA is indeed laughable. If Mahama’s government, the Board and Management of NLA are willing to pay a judgement debt of  US$ 20 Billion then they can proceed with the cancellations of KGL Contract.

There is no justification to call for restoration of legal compliance with Act 722 because there is NO violation of any sections of Act 722 by KGL-NLA Contract.

The Legal Exclusivity license of KGL is purely in the interest of NLA, and also serves as insurance for both NLA and KGL in highly volatile industry like lottery operations.

An independent forensic audit is probably needed for the contract of :
1. NLA-Lots Services Ghana Limited.

2. NLA-Simnet Ghana Limited.

3. NLA-B2B License under Act 722 because NLA has no legal rights to license B2B companies under Act 722. NLA can only license Private Lotto Operators(B2B) under Act 844, and accordingly share the proceeds from the license fees with Veterans Administration, Ghana(VAG).

4. All other third-party contracts serving as liabilities and taking huge amount of monies from the National Lottery Authority.

5. NLA-Blue Star Lotto arrangements.

The Real Problems at NLA
After carefully scrutinizing all the third-party contracts with the National Lottery Authority(NLA), we can authoritatively state that, the contract between NLA and KGL Technology Limited is the best so far since the establishment of the National Lottery Authority(NLA), further creating value for money to the Authority.

All third-party contracts at NLA takes money away from the Authority EXCEPT KGL Technology Limited which rather gives substantial amount of money to the Authority on yearly basis at no cost and stress to the Authority.

Below is the Direct Cost Expenditures of the National Lottery Authority(NLA) on daily basis:

1. Payments of Lotto Prizes(winning lottery tickets) – 50% of the gross revenue generated.

2. Payments of lotto Commission to the Lotto Marketing Companies operating via the kiosks using the Lots Services Ghana Limited platform or Simnet Ghana Limited platform – 25% of the gross revenue generated.

3. Payments of Technical Services Fees to Lots Services Ghana Limited – 5% of the gross revenue generated.

4. Payments of Technical Services Fees to Simnet Ghana Limited – 6% of the gross revenue generated.

5. Payments of Technical Services Fees to other service providers – 6% of the gross revenue generated.

6. Payments of GPRS Fees to the Telecos – 1.5% of gross revenue generated.

7. Payments of Thermal Paper Rolls Fees to Suppliers – 1.5% of the gross revenue generated.

8. Payments of Maintenance Fees (POSTs Fees) to Lots Services Ghana Limited – 1% of the gross revenue generated.

Therefore, Total Direct Cost Expenditure on Lotto Intake (84%) excluding Other Revenues. The remaining 16% shared between NLA(about 6%) and the Consolidated Fund(10%). This implies that, the National Lottery Authority(NLA) only retains 6% of the gross revenue generated from daily sales of lottery products. The 6% is subsequently used by the Authority to service its indirect Cost Expenditures.

Per the existing arrangements between NLA and the third-party contracts, the Authority is always indebted to the Technical Service Providers, Telecos, Suppliers of thermal paper rolls, staking public, and Lotto Marketing Companies, and this indebtedness always become worsening whenever the winning ratios after draw exceeds 50% of the gross revenue generated.

The best form of Public-Private Partnerships(PPPs) between National Lottery Authority(NLA) and the technical service providers such as Lots Services Ghana Limited, and Simnet Ghana Limited should have been the charging of 6% on net profit after the deductions of Lotto Prizes (50%), LMC/ Receivers Commission (25%), Thermal Paper Rolls(1.5%), GPRS Fees of Telecos (1.5%), and the cost of Sales and Marketing Expenses.

The Lots Services Ghana Limited signed an initial contract of fifteen(15) years with NLA subject to review and renewal whereas Simnet Ghana Limited also signed ten(10) years contract with NLA subject to review and renewal.

The Indirect Cost Expenditures of the National Lottery Authority is as follows:

1. Selling, Distribution, and Marketing Expenses including Business Promotions, CSR Activities, Good Cause Expenses, Sales Rewards, Courier Services, and Others.

2. Personal Emoluments such as Salaries, Wages, Staff Training, Staff Allowances, Staff Insurance, and Other Staff Cost.

3. Maintenance Cost of PPE ( Plant, Property, and Equipment).

ICT Problems at NLA
The information technology infrastructure of National Lottery Authority(NLA) is not highly secured as compared to the indigenous banks and any other financial institutions in Ghana. Due to these unsafe infrastructure, NLA is not able to pay winners directly from its ICT systems.

To attest to this, NLA has Collaboration agreements with Nsano Ghana Limited and Etransact Ghana Limited which pay small amount of lotto prizes to winners on behalf of NLA. If indeed NLA has the secured ICT infrastructure it would definitely not need such payment Collaborations.

As we speak the NLA together with its Technical Services Providers might NOT have ISO certifications but KGL Technology Limited has ISO Certification for its ICT infrastructures, meeting the highest international standards.

Licensing of Private Lotto Operators(B2B)
The proceeds from the licensing of Private Lotto Operators and Agents popularly known as “Banker-to-Banker Lotto” though brings in revenue to the Authority but unfortunately the revenue generated from license fees are very poor and highly insignificant considering the market dominance of the B2B lottery operations covering about 80% of the market share of the lottery industry.

Yearly, all the license fees collected from Private Lotto Operators and Agents will NOT exceed GHS 30 million.

Also, it is important to draw the attention of the current Board that all Private Lotto Operators and Agents can only be licensed under section 22 of the VAG Act 844, not Act 722, and it is very vital for the current Board and Management of the Authority to correct the errors of Awuku-Gary administration of licensing Private Lotto Operators and Agents under Act 722.

Challenges of NLA
The main challenges facing National Lottery Authority in its revenue mobilization efforts are:
1. Illegal lottery operations, constituting about 80% of the lottery industry.

2. Stigmatization of lottery staking.

3. Direct Cost Expenditures to the Technical Service Providers(6%+ 6%=12%) and Telecos(1.5%)

4. Rainfall, seriously affecting sales in the Lotto Kiosks.

Conclusion
The EXIT of KGL Technology Limited SHALL completely Collapse NLA. Without KGL, NLA can NEVER pay its employees, pay winning tickets, and pay their indebtedness to third-party contracts.

KGL has NEVER taken any money away from the NLA, and NLA too has NEVER paid any money to KGL Technology Limited. It is as simple as that.

KGL-NLA Contract is 100% backed by Act 722 and Lottery Regulations, 2008(L.I. 1948).

“Yɛbɛ ti nsem bebreee” against KGL so Ghanaians particularly the staking public should not perturbed.

Issued by: Razak Kojo Opoku, Former Head of PR, NLA under Osei-Ameyaw Administration

The Executive Director of the Good Governance Advocacy Group, Ghana, and a member of NDC Communication team, Listowel Nana Kusi-Poku has unfortunately and sadly out of ignorance miseducated the general public as well as peddled falsehood about NLA-KGL contractual relationship on Class TV(CTV).

First and foremost, let me state categorically and authoritatively that:

1. Mr. Alex Dadey has ABSOLUTELY NO business relationship with Hon. Ken Ofori-Atta, and that Hon. Ken Ofori-Atta has NO business connection to KGL Group.

2. Nana Akufo-Addo and Ken Ofori-Atta are NOT Shareholders, or Stakeholders or Investors or Benificiaries or Consultants or Board Members or Directors of KGL Group.

Respectfully, even a layman could have easily verified the company’s records before publicly attacking the entity, and I am wondering if Listowel Nana Kusi-Poku is far below an idiot?

We have seen worse attacks, misleading information, and peddled falsehoods against KGL Group in the media space since the days of Nana Akufo-Addo’s government from some leading figures of the NPP so the attacks from Listowel Nana-Poku against KGL Group is just comedic.

Moving to the operations of National Lottery Authority(NLA), per the National Lotto Act, 2006(Act 722), all the business operations of NLA are 100% PRIVATELY Managed. The NLA itself, apart from regulating, licensing, and conducting lotto draws, DOES NOT directly sell lottery products via Online or in the Lotto Kiosks. The National Lottery Authority(NLA) since its establishment in 1958 originally as the Department of National Lotteries(DNL) has always raised revenue for the State through third-party companies including Lotto Marketing Companies(previously known as National Lotto Receivers Union).

Under Section 2(4) of the National Lotto Act 722, the National Lottery Authority(NLA) is mandated to “enter into collaboration, partnership or joint venture with any person, society, association, or corporate entity, to operate a game of chance in accordance with existing laws(including Lottery Regulations 1948). However, should there be losses from the game of chance, the collaborator, partner or entity shall not be compensated by the State or from the Lotto Account provided for under Section 32”.

The questions are:
1. Has NLA ever paid any money to KGL Group for its operational losses and payments of winning tickets? Absolutely NO.

2. Has NLA ever contributed financial resources to KGL? Absolutely NO.

3. Is KGL Group taking money away from the NLA just like the technical service providers and third-party contracts at the NLA? Absolutely NO.

4. Has KGL Group ever defaulted in its payments to the NLA? Absolutely NO.

5. Has KGL Group ever conducted its own 5/90 Lotto Draws parallel to the Lotto Draws of NLA? Absolutely NO.

6. Is KGL Group affiliated with Nana Akufo-Addo and Ken Ofori-Atta or the New Patriotic Party(NPP)? Absolutely NO.

7. Was KGL contract illegally acquired from the NLA in contravention with National Lotto Act 2006,(Act 722)? Absolutely NO.

8. Is KGL Group undermining the revenue mobilization efforts of government? Absolutely NO.

9. Is KGL Group giving honest value chain to government, NLA, GRA, NCA and Bank of Ghana? Absolutely YES.

10. Is KGL Group a law abiding Corporate entity in the Ghanaian business environment? Absolutely YES.

11. Is KGL Group assisting NLA to generate revenue for the State as well as fighting illegal lottery operations & stigmatization associated with lottery staking at no cost to the NLA? Absolutely YES.

12. Is KGL Group giving value for money to the sustainability of NLA? Absolutely YES.

13. Is KGL Group duly operating as a Lotto Marketing Company, assisting NLA to be competitive in the lottery industry dominated by 80% of illegal Lottery Operations? Absolutely YES.

14. Is KGL Group giving money which is more valuable and substantial than any company duly licensed by the NLA? Absolutely YES.

15. Was KGL Group legitimately licensed under Act 722 and Lottery Regulations 1948? Absolutely YES.

16. Was KGL contract legally approved by the Board and Management of NLA? Absolutely YES.

To further expose the ignorance of Listowel Nana Kusi-Poku and others harboring hatred against the operations of KGL Group, it must be noted that;

1. KGL Technology Limited was duly licensed under Sections 2(4), 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 20 of the National Lotto Act, 2006(Act 722) supported by Lottery Regulations, 2008(L.l. 1948).

2. Most importantly, the representatives of Attorney-General, Ministry of Interior, and Ministry of Finance on the Board of National Lottery Authority(NLA) are NOT gullible. Such respected and well-learned personalities would definitely do proper scrutiny before approving the contract of KGL Group with the NLA.

In all humility and sincerity, I don’t think that the intelligence level of Listowel Nana Kusi-Poku is at par with the aforementioned representatives of the Ministry of Finance, Attorney-General, and Ministry of Interior on the Board of NLA.

Nation building is not based on empty hatred, Populist rants, and sponsored attacks against genuine businessmen including Mr. Alex Dadey.

As Executive Director of the Good Governance Advocacy Group, it is expected that Listowel Nana Kusi-Poku would argue his case from the standpoint of facts, accurate information and right data sources, not childishly resorting to noise-making, falsehoods, media blackmail and unjustified hatred against KGL Group and Mr. Alex Apau Dadey.

You can attack KGL but do so from the standpoint of wisdom and knowledge, not with fabrications, distortions, and maliciousness.

Issued by: Razak Kojo Opoku, Former Head of PR, NLA under Osei-Ameyaw Administration

In a twist of political irony, the National Democratic Congress (NDC), once a staunch opponent of the Electronic Transfer Levy (E-Levy), has introduced a new GH₵1 per litre fuel levy that far exceeds the burden of the much-criticized E-Levy. This decision contradicts the NDC’s prior position as champions of the ordinary Ghanaian and raises serious questions about fairness, economic justice, and policy consistency.

This article examines the real impact of the new fuel levy, dissects its redundancy given the already existing fuel-related taxes, and argues why its imposition is economically regressive, politically contradictory, and socially unsustainable.

The Reality: Ghanaians Already Paying Over 40% of Fuel Cost in Taxes and Levies

Many Ghanaians may not realize it, but every time they buy a litre of fuel, they are not just paying for the petroleum itself but are also paying more than 40% of that cost to the government through a complex web of taxes, levies, and margins. These charges have quietly but significantly inflated the pump price of fuel, making life harder for consumers long before the latest GH₵1 fuel levy was introduced.

For instance, the Energy Debt Recovery Levy, which takes GH₵0.49 per litre, was introduced to help repay legacy debts from the Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) and other energy sector liabilities. Then there’s the Road Fund Levy, contributing GH₵0.48 per litre, which is intended for road maintenance and infrastructure but its effectiveness remains questionable, given the poor state of many roads across the country.

The Energy Fund Levy, though relatively small at GH₵0.01 per litre, supports the operations of the Energy Commission. The Price Stabilization and Recovery Levy (PSRL), set at GH₵0.16 per litre, was originally meant to shield consumers from volatile fuel prices and subsidize premix and residual fuel oils yet, ironically, this levy remains in place even when fuel prices keep soaring, leaving consumers with no real sense of “stabilization.”

Ghanaians also pay a Sanitation and Pollution Levy of GH₵0.10 per litre, which aims to tackle sanitation issues. However, many citizens continue to live amidst growing waste problems and underwhelming environmental management.

Similarly, the Energy Sector Recovery Levy, at GH₵0.20 per litre, is designed to restructure and recover costs in the energy sector, a sector that continues to suffer from inefficiencies and frequent disruptions.

On top of these levies is the Special Petroleum Tax, costing consumers GH₵0.46 per litre. This tax, introduced under VAT reforms, is explicitly designed to generate revenue for the State but with limited transparency on how that revenue is utilized.

Then, there are operational and logistical margins like the Primary Distribution Margin (GH₵0.11), which covers the cost of moving fuel from coastal depots to inland areas, and the BOST Margin (GH₵0.09), which helps maintain the infrastructure of the Bulk Oil Storage and Transportation company.

Further adding to the cost is the Fuel Marking Margin at GH₵0.05 per litre, which goes toward tracking fuel products to reduce adulteration and tax evasion. Meanwhile, Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) take GH₵0.46 per litre as their profit margin (called the Marketers’ Margin), and retailers (such as fuel stations) also take their share.

All of these charges cumulatively mean that nearly half of what you pay at the pump isn’t for the fuel itself, but for a tangle of levies and margins, and some of which duplicate each other’s purpose or have failed to deliver their promised benefits.

Against this backdrop, the newly introduced GH₵1 fuel levy by the NDC government is not just a new charge rather it is an excessive addition to an already bloated tax structure. The state is already extracting significant revenue from each litre sold. This begs the question: Why impose an entirely new fuel levy when the existing ones should already be generating billions of cedis annually?

Before asking Ghanaians to bear more burden, the government must first justify the continued existence of each of these older levies, and It must demonstrate that the funds collected have been used effectively and transparently. Without this accountability, any new tax no matter how noble its stated purpose will be viewed as unjust, insensitive, and economically dangerous.

GH₵1 Dumsor Levy: An Unnecessary and Redundant Addition

The justification given for the new levy is to fund development and energy transition initiatives particularly addressing Dumsor. However, the same objectives already exist within current levies:
1. Energy Sector Recovery Levy (GH₵0.20) and Energy Debt Recovery Levy (GH₵0.49) were both introduced to address energy-related financing gaps.

2. Sanitation Levy (GH₵0.10) addresses environmental concerns also cited in defense of the new fuel tax.

3. PSRL (GH₵0.16) exists specifically to stabilize prices yet consumers rarely benefit from such interventions, raising questions of accountability.

The GH₵1 per litre fuel levy is therefore not introducing anything new. Rather, it duplicates existing levies, without offering any new accountability framework or measurable benefit to citizens.

Economic Impact: Direct Cost Comparison of NDC GHS 1 Dumsor Levy with NPP E-Levy

Let’s compare the new GH₵1 Dumsor levy to the previous 1% E-levy.
The E-Levy, introduced under the NPP, applied a 1% charge on electronic financial transactions such as mobile money and bank transfers. Its impact was limited primarily to digital users, that is, individuals who used electronic platforms for sending or receiving money. For those who preferred cash transactions, the levy was completely avoidable.

In contrast, the fuel levy introduced by the NDC imposes a fixed GH₵1 tax on every litre of fuel purchased. This is a *blanket tax* that affects every Ghanaian, directly or indirectly. Whether you own a car or not, whether you live in the city or in a rural area, this levy touches you because transportation is the backbone of the economy.

Goods, food, public transport, and even electricity (in areas relying on generators) are now going to be extremely more expensive under Mahama’s Dumsor Levy.

The monthly cost difference is staggering. A typical commercial driver using about 30 litres of fuel per day will now pay approximately GH₵900 more each month just from the new levy. In comparison, if that same driver made GH₵2,000 in electronic transfers in a month, his E-Levy charge would have been only GH₵20 which is a tiny fraction.

Moreover, the economic ripple effect of the fuel levy is far more damaging. The E-Levy had minimal inflationary consequences because it targeted digital transfers rather than the physical flow of goods and services. However, the Dumsor levy raises the cost of transportation, which in turn increases the price of nearly all goods and services in the country. It drives up inflation and reduces the purchasing power of ordinary Ghanaians especially the poor masses and working class.

In essence, while the E-Levy was targeted and avoidable, the Dumsor levy is broad, unavoidable, and economically regressive.

Even for those who never use digital services, the Dumsor levy will affect their transport, food prices, electricity (via generators), and general cost of living. A trotro driver using 30 litres a day now pays GH₵30 more daily, which translates to GH₵900 monthly, a burden 45x greater than the average monthly cost of the E-Levy.

Inflationary Pressures on the Poor Masses

Fuel prices influence nearly every sector: food, transportation, manufacturing, agriculture, and logistics. A GH₵1 hike per litre means higher fares, higher food prices, and higher prices on all goods that are transported, and in everything, Inflation hits the poor hardest.

Political Contradiction: The NDC’s Reversal of Its Own Anti-Tax Rhetoric

In opposition, the NDC called the E-Levy “insensitive, anti-poor, and oppressive”, and leading figures of the NDC including Hon. Dr. Ato Forson, current Minister of Finance led nationwide campaigns against the E-levy. In fact, NDC through the influence of John Mahama then Opposition leader created serious difficulties in Parliament regarding the passage of the E-levy Act yet after winning political power has introduced Dumsor Levy of GHS 1 on every litre of fuel which is:
(a) Harder to avoid
(b) More economically damaging
(c) More inflationary
(d) More regressive especially on the poor masses who uses trotro as means of transportation.

By introducing Dumsor levy now, the NDC has committed a strategic and ethical contradiction, one that damages public trust. Ghanaians voted for relief, not reinforced hardship.

Mismanagement and Inefficiency of Existing Levies

Before introducing any new fuel taxes, the government should first account for how existing levies are managed. For example:
1. The Price Stabilization and Recovery Levy is rarely used to stabilize prices.

2. The Energy Sector Recovery Levy and Energy Debt Recovery Levy continue to exist with no public audit or sunset clause, even though sector restructuring was promised.

3. The Road Fund Levy is collected religiously, yet roads remain poor, especially in rural and peri-urban areas.

The lack of transparency and proper utilization of current fuel-related levies undermines the moral authority to impose new ones.

Conclusion: Scrap the Dumsor Levy and Rationalize Existing Ones as Stated in Section 152(Page 43) of 2025 Budget Speech

The introduction of the GH₵1 per litre fuel levy is economically unjustifiable, politically hypocritical, and socially regressive. Ghanaians are already overburdened by an excessive array of fuel-related taxes and levies. What is needed is not more taxation, but:
1. A rationalization of existing levies, that is, merging redundant ones and scrapping irrelevant ones.

2. Public accountability mechanisms for each fuel-related tax.

3. Economic relief policies, not punitive fiscal tools in a time of hardship.

The NDC must choose between governing with empathy and governing with expedience.

If Mahama’s government truly stands with the people especially the already suffering poor masses, it must scrap or suspend this Dumsor levy with immediate effect, restore trust, and begin a transparent dialogue about fuel pricing, addressing Dumsor, and taxation in Ghana.

Signed
Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President of UP Tradition Institute

In the 2025 Budget Speech, we were told by Hon. Dr. Ato Forson in section 6(Page 2) that, Mahama’s government will be seeking to review a number of Acts including the “Energy Sector Levies Act, 2015(Act 899)” but nothing was said about the introduction of GHS 1 tax on every liter of fuel after the amendments to Energy Sector Levies Act.

The pricing of goods and services in Ghana is largely influenced by fuel prices and exchange rate instability particularly fuel prices.

According to Section 27(Page 7) of the 2025 Budget Speech, Hon. Dr. Ato Forson indicated that, “Mr Speaker, the extensive consultations(with traders as captured in Section 26 of 2025 Budget Speech, Page 7) revealed that the overriding concern among Ghanaian traders and the business community, remains price and exchange rate instability”.

If we may recall, Mahama’s government asked traders and the business community to reduce prices for goods and services simply because of the recent Cedi Appreciation, so now, how would the traders and the business community adjust the pricing of goods and services in response to the GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel since transportation is going to be expensive?

In section 56(Page 13) of the 2025 Budget Speech, we were informed that, the central government has arrears/payables of $1.73 billion owed to the Independent Power Producers(also reiterated in Section 84 Page 18 of 2025 Budget Speech), and GHS 68 billion owed by the Electricity Company of Ghana(ECG) coupled with Energy Sector Financing Shortfall of GHS 35 billion for 2025 as mentioned in Sections 80-83(Pages 17-18) of the 2025 Budget Speech under the headline of “Energy Sector Fiscal Risks”.

However, if you read about the “2025 Energy Sector Measures” in Section 136(Pages 38-39) of the 2025 Budget Speech, there is absolutely nothing about the implementation of a tax policy of GHS 1 on every litre of fuel to address DUMSOR as part of the Energy Sector Recovery Programme Interventions.

In Section 137(Page 39), Mahama’s government indicates to Ghanaians that:
(i). PURC will continue to implement the Quarterly Tariff Adjustment to reflect changes in inflation, exchange rate, and generation mix;
(ii). PURC will also undertake the major Tariff Adjustment which will be due in the 4th quarter of 2025 to reflect capacity charges, additional liquid fuel usage, and additional capex.

The question many Ghanaians are asking Mahama’s government is that, would the GHS 1 on every litre of fuel co-exist with the aforementioned measures by PURC?, and how would that be deemed as fairness to the Ghanaian people especially the traders, business community and various households?

Another important question to Mahama’s government is that, does it make economic sense in Section 141(Page 41) of 2025 Budget Speech to:
1. Abolish Emission Levy on industries and vehicles, and 3 months later start the implementation of GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel?

2. Abolish VAT on motor vehicle insurance policy, and 3 months later start the implementation of GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel?

3. Abolish the Electronic Transfer Levy(E-levy) of 1%, and 3 months later start the implementation of GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel?
Make no mistake, tax on fuel would significantly affect the wellbeing and quality of life for the poor masses than tax on momo transactions.

The implementation of GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel clearly has defeated the claim of Mahama’s government in Section 142(Page 41) of 2025 Budget Speech. The introduction of GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel will increase the burden on households, completely erodes their disposal incomes, and in addition, undermine the growth of businesses as well as decrease tax compliance.

Indeed, the GHS 1 tax on every litre of fuel has seriously exposed Mahama’s 2025 Budget Statement and Economic Policy as a “Significant Lies”, and I said so because it is stated in Section 152(Page 43) of the 2025 Budget Speech that, “without increasing the levy, we will also review the Energy Sector Levies Act(ESLA) to consolidate the Energy Debt Recovery Levy, Energy Sector Recovery Levy(Delta Fund), and Sanitation & Pollution Levy into one levy and use the proceeds to cater for the energy sector shortfalls and service the inherited debt service obligation”.

Signed
Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President of UP Tradition Institute

The first 120 days of John Mahama’s second term in office has seen some significant achievements in the areas of fiscal and monetary policies including the much talked about of the recent appreciation of the Cedi against US dollar and other major international trading currencies.

However, it is worthy to let Ghanaians know the key contributions of Akufo-Addo’s government to the performance of Mahama’s government within the 120 days as follows:

1. Cedi Appreciation: Bearing Fruits of NPP “Gold for Forex” Initiatives & other Interventions

The CEO of GoldBod, Sammy Gyamfi has been demanding answers to the two questions below:
1. Accumulating physical gold reserves, with a dollar to cedi exchange rate of GHS 16? or

2. Accumulating adequate forex liquidity through unprecedented gold exports, with a dollar to Cedi exchange rate of GHS 12.2?

First and foremost, any well-read learned lawyer would rather argue from the standpoint of tonnes accumulated over a period of time, not the value of exchange rate since several factors affect the appreciation and depreciation of Currency.

The CEO of GoldBod unfortunately is rushing above his gold-economics intelligence.

Respectfully, the CEO of GoldBod should appreciate the fact that, the physical gold reserves left behind by the NPP Government is largely responsible and part of the unprecedented gold exports executed by Mahama’s government to accumulate the adequate forex liquidity at the exchange rate of GHS 12.2.

The Bank of Ghana Gold Reserves hit 31.37 tonnes at the end of April 2025.

Out of this figure, what has been the contribution of GoldBod to the 31.37 tonnes of Gold and under which Budget utilization from January to April 2025?

A robust physical gold reserve position enhances the resilience of Ghana’s balance of payments, ensuring adequate buffer against external economic shocks, and strengthening the monetary policy decisions of Bank of Ghana.

Even, President John Mahama, speaking at the opening ceremony of Ghana-EU Business Forum held in Accra, admitted and acknowledged the undeniable fact that, Akufo-Addo’s government left behind $8.98 billion reserves, creating positive significant impact on the Cedi against the US Dollar and other trading currencies.

The NPP’s $8.98 billion has significantly supported forex inflows, improved trade balancing as well as growing investor’s confidence in Mahama’s government.

According to John Mahama, “our gross international reserves have improved further from $8.98 billion in December 2024 to $10.6 billion by April 2025”. Mathematically, the inference is that between January-April 2025, John Mahama’s government has added only $1.62 billion to the Reserves of Ghana, even largely underpinning by the revenue mobilization strategies of NPP’s Mini-Budget for the 1st quarter of 2025 approved by Parliament on 3rd January 2025.

Until and unless Mahama’s government through the GoldBod is able to add more gold to the Reserves exceeding $8.98 billion left behind by the NPP government, the NDC has absolutely no moral or legal or ethical or economic rights to take full 100% credit for the recent appreciation of the Cedi against the US Dollar and other trading currencies.

The Domestic Gold Purchase Programme(DGPP) and “Gold for Oil”Policy so far have done greater good to the Cedi than Mahama’s GoldBod though we cannot completely also ignore the fact that the monopolistic GoldBod has played its role in the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

Categorically, Akufo-Addo’s government is responsible for about 80-90% of gold reserves of Ghana from 2021-April 2025, with the greater credit to the Bank of Ghana under the leadership of Governor Ernest Addison.

John Mahama’s government has been lucky enough to have inherited an already recovering economy from Akufo-Addo’s government.

Also, the admission and acknowledgement of $8.98 billion reserves by John Mahama sincerely indicates that John Mahama and the NDC LIED to the good people of Ghana that NPP criminally managed the economy.

Dr. Ato Forson authoritatively indicated in Section 104, page 24 of the 2025 Budget Speech that, “Mr. Speaker, provisional 2024 GDP Statistics published by Ghana Statistical Service(GSS) on 10th March 2025 shows that overall real GDP grew by 5.7% in 2024 compared to the growth rate of 3.1% recorded in 2023, and non-oil GDP grew by 6% in 2024 compared with a growth rate of 3.6% recorded in 2023(Section 105, Page 24 of 2025 Budget Speech).

In fact, this is a solid economic recovery foundation left behind by Akufo-Addo’s government to John Mahama’s government.

Sammy Gyamfi should NOT also forget that before the operations of GoldBod on 2nd April 2025, there were functionality and operationalization of:
1. Precious Minerals Marketing Company(PMMC), later amended to the current GoldBod, headed by Sammy Gyamfi. Mr. Gyamfi was initially appointed as CEO for PMMC, not GoldBod, and actually started working with the architecture of PMMC for three(3) months until the Ghana Gold Board Act, 2025(Act 1140) was passed in March 2025 and assented into law on 2nd April 2025.

2. Domestic Gold Purchase Programme which began in 2021, with special credit to Akufo-Addo’s government.

The Domestic Gold Purchase Programme(DGPP),and Gold for Oil Policy implemented under the guidance of Akufo-Addo’s government seriously underpins Ghana’s “Gold for Forex” intervention for the appreciation of the Cedi.

3. Minerals Income Investment Fund(MIIF) envisioned by former President Akufo-Addo, and implemented by Ken Ofori-Atta, former Minister of Finance.

Due to the viability and relevance of Minerals Income Investment Fund(MIIF), in accordance with Section 135 of the 2025 Budget Speech presented to Parliament by Dr. Ato Forson, Minister of Finance, the Mahama’s government would amend the Minerals Income Investment Fund Act to ensure that, 80% of Mineral Royalties originally maintained by MIIF is transferred to the Consolidated Fund for infrastructure development and strengthen social protection initiatives of Mahama’s government(Pages 37-38 of the 2025 Budget Speech).

4. Ghana-IMF Programme started by Akufo-Addo’s government until 2026. John Mahama’s government inherited a $3 billion Extended Credit Facility from NPP government, with $370 million tranche hitting the account of Bank Ghana very soon.

The current Ghana-IMF programme has really created fiscal discipline and macro-stability for the Ghanaian economy, thereby boosting investor’s confidence in the economy.

The existence of the IMF programme has largely prevented Mahama’s government from reckless expenditures.

We would patiently wait to see the outcome of Ghana’s economy under Mahama’s government after the IMF Fiscal Discipline Programme with Ghana comes to an end in 2026.

2. Mini-Budget for 1st Quarter of 2025 Presented to Parliament by Akufo-Addo’s Government

It is without any argument and doubt that, Ghana was governed by John Mahama within the 120 days using Akufo-Addo’s Mini-Budget for 1st Quarter of 2025 passed by Parliament on 3rd January 2025.

Until Hon. Dr. Ato Forson presented the Budget on the 11th March 2025, John Mahama’s Administration was operating with Akufo-Addo’s Mini-Budget for 1st
quarter of 2025 in accordance with the relevant laws of the Country.

The Mini-Budget delivered by Hon. Dr. Mohammed Amin Adam on behalf of Akufo-Addo’s government was responsible for funding government operations for the 1st quarter of 2025, pending the substantive budget presentation by Mahama’s government.

The allocations of Akufo-Addo’s Mini-Budget focused on critical government functions including GHS 2.37 billion tax refunds, healthcare, education, public service costs, and infrastructure development across the country.

Akufo-Addo’s Mini-Budget helped Mahama’s government to sustain essential services, address pressing fiscal & monetary needs of Ghana, ensuring the sustainability of economic stability, as well as revenue mobilization strategies.

The Akufo-Addo’s 68.13 billion Ghana Cedis Mini-Budget for 1st Quarter of 2025 has the following deliverables:
1. GHS 16.46 billion for payment of employees salaries.
2. GHS 3.12 billion for payment of goods and services.
3. GHS 20.69 billion for interest payments, including obligations to Independent Power Producers(IPPs), and the Energy Sector Levy Account(ESLA).
4. GHS 45.50 million for subsidies.
5. GHS 9.19 billion allocated to government agencies.
6. and several other components not mentioned here.

3. Payment of Domestic Bondholders by Mahama’s Government

It is undeniable fact that, John Mahama’s government was able to honour the following payment interventions in February 2025 largely influenced by the Mini-Budget of Akufo-Addo’s government:
1. Payment-in-Cash(PIC) coupon of GHS 6.081 billion to all Domestic Debt Exchange Programme(DDEP) bondholders.
2. Payment-in-Kind(PIK) portion of GHS 3.46 billion, deposited into the respective bondholders’ securities accounts in line with the DDEP Memorandum secured by Akufo-Addo’s government.
3. Payment of GHS 9.7 billion into the Debt Service Recovery Cedi Account(Sinking Fund) as a buffer for the 5th DDEP coupon due in July and August, 2025.

The Debt Exchange Programme was a necessary evil intervention taken by Akufo-Addo’s government, attracted the hatred of Ghanaians but now serving as a blessing and breathing room to John Mahama’s government.

The 2025 Budget Statement of Mahama’s government indicates that, “Mr. Speaker, you may recall that the government(Akufo-Addo’s government) commenced the debt restructuring programme in 2022 to RESTORE DEBT SUSTAINABILITY and ECONOMIC STABILITY.

Mr. Speaker, as of now, the restructuring process is approximately 93% completed. The remaining 7% relates to debt of $2.7 billion owed to commercial creditors. We are committed to completing the remaining debt restructuring as soon as possible”(Sections 101, 102 and 103: Pages 23-24 of 2025 Budget Speech delivered on 11th March 2025).

Additionally, Dr. Ato Forson admitted in Section 100 of the Budget Speech as follows, “Mr. Speaker, the reduction in debt -to-GDP ratio and the dollar component of our debt stock is as a result of the 37% haircut on the principal of the Eurobond debt under the debt restructuring programme” (Page 23 of 2025 Budget Speech), with greater credit to Ken Ofori-Atta and Dr. Mohammed Amin Adam, two former Ministers of Finance Akufo-Addo’s government.

Now, my question to Sammy Gyamfi, CEO of GoldBod and NDC Members are as follows:
(a). What would have been the current situation of the Cedi and the economy of Ghana if NPP government (with greater credit to Ken Ofori-Atta and Dr. Mohammed Amin Adam) was unable to successfully restructured 93% of Ghana’s debt caused by successive governments?

(b). How do you(NDC members) take full 100% credit for Cedi Appreciation when your efforts to Ghana’s debt restructuring is just 7%? This would certainly be an unreasonable and unjustifiable glory.

Signed
Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President, UP Tradition Institute

SikkaNews
Kwame Asare

The Bank of Ghana (BoG) began preserving gold reserves in 1961 during the administration of President Kwame Nkrumah. However, this practice was discontinued in 1962 due to a decline in gold prices and a strategic shift towards holding foreign currency and securities as reserve assets.

President Jerry John Rawlings (1993–2001)

President Rawlings’ administration focused on liberalizing the mining sector to attract foreign investment. This led to the enactment of the Minerals and Mining Law of 1986, which aimed to create a more favorable environment for mining activities, including gold extraction. While this law was passed before his presidency, its implementation during his tenure significantly influenced the growth of the gold sector.

President John Agyekum Kufuor (2001–2009)

During President Kufuor’s administration, Ghana’s gold sector saw substantial growth. In 2008, Ghana’s gold output rose by 4% to 2.6 million ounces, and higher prices pushed overall mining revenues to $2.3 billion, up 28% from 2007 .

To further develop the sector, Kufuor’s government undertook initiatives such as:
1. Sending over 800 small-scale miners to China: Between 2007 and 2008, the administration facilitated a trip for more than 800 small-scale miners to China to study mining operations. This initiative aimed to enhance local mining practices and foster international partnerships.

2. Enacting the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703): This law consolidated previous mining laws and introduced provisions to regulate small-scale mining, including sections 81 to 99, which specifically addressed small-scale mining activities.

3. Promoting local ownership: President Kufuor encouraged the development of local entrepreneurs in the mining sector, urging the Minerals Commission to implement policies that would enable Ghanaians to own and operate large-scale mining ventures. These efforts contributed to Ghana’s position as Africa’s second-largest gold producer by 2008.

President John Atta Mills (2009–2012)

1. Mills administration reviewed mining agreements, particularly those seen as overly favorable to multinational companies.

2. Strengthened Ghana’s participation in Extractive Industries Initiative (EITI) to increase transparency in gold revenues and contracts.

3. Promoted policies aimed at increasing Ghanaian participation in the gold mining value chain.

4. While not a new “programme” per se, Mills was instrumental in reviewing Ghana’s gold mining fiscal regime to ensure more equitable benefit for the country.

President John Mahama (2012–2017)

1. The first term of Mahama’s government focus on addressing Illegal Mining, as well as Value Addition.

2. Inter-Ministerial Task Force(IMTF) on Illegal Mining was established in 2013.
The task force targeted the illegal small-scale mining (galamsey), especially its environmental impact.

3. Encouraged the establishment of gold refineries (e.g., plans to support the Precious Minerals Marketing Company – PMMC).

4. With respect to Gold Royalties Management, Mahama’s government continued the EITI policy and considered reforms in how royalties were distributed and used.

However, Mahama’s government faced key challenge such as rising crisis of galamsey.

Galamsey reached crisis levels, and Mahama’s administration faced pressure to curb illegal mining while balancing livelihoods.

Ghana Gold Reserves data reached an all-time high of 2,000.000 Metric Ton in 2014 and a record low of 990.000 Metric Ton in 2016.

President Nana Akufo-Addo (2017–2026)

1. “Gold for Oil” Policy (2022-March 2025) was implemented by Akufo-Addo’s government to ensure the stabilization of fuel prices on the domestic market.

The “Gold for Oil” Policy was aimed at exchanging gold for refined petroleum products to reduce pressure on foreign reserves and stabilize the Cedi. However, despite the “Gold for Oil” Policy, the cedi keeps on depreciating against the US Dollar and the other trading currencies.

2. Establishment of a Gold Refinery.
Akufo-Addo’s government collaborated with Rosy Royal Investments to build a national gold refinery in partnership with PMMC.

3. Formalized small-scale mining under regulated frameworks to reduce illegal mining and improve community benefit.

4. Set up the Agyapa Royalties Deal (2020).
Attempted to monetize gold royalties by creating Agyapa Royalties Ltd, a special-purpose vehicle listed in London. The deal faced criticism over transparency and was suspended.

5. Bank of Ghana’s Gold Purchase Programme(2021)
Initiated to build gold reserves by buying domestically mined gold with cedis to strengthen the economy.

In June 2021, the Bank of Ghana (BoG) reintroduced gold as a component of its reserves through the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP).

This initiative, launched under the governorship of Dr. Ernest Addison, aimed to bolster the country’s foreign reserves by purchasing gold from local producers using Ghanaian cedis.

Let me put on record that, the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme(DGPP) of Bank of Ghana is completely different from the Bawumia’s proposed “Gold for Oil” Policy.

As of April 2025, the BoG’s gold reserves had increased to 31.37 tonnes, representing a significant rise from 8.77 tonnes in 2022.

Also, Ghana Gold Reserves was reported at 1,000.000 Metric Ton in December 2024, and this stayed constant from the previous number of 1,000.000 Metric Ton for December 2023.

Ghana Gold Reserves data is updated yearly, averaging 1,000.000 Metric Ton from December 2008 to 2024, with 17 observations.

President John Mahama(7th Jan 2025 – Present)

President John Mahama in his second term has also establish the Ghana Gold Board(GoldBod) to contribute to the “Gold for Reserves” Policy of Ghana.

*Conclusion*
In summary, the Bank of Ghana first began preserving gold reserves in 1961 under President Kwame Nkrumah’s regime. After a hiatus, the practice was actively and astronomically revived in 2021 during Dr. Ernest Addison’s tenure as Governor under Domestic Gold Purchase Programme(DGPP).

…. Signed….
Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President, UP Tradition Institute.

sikkaNews

The recent appreciation of the Cedi against the US dollar and other trading currencies has led to many arguments and credit-taking competitions.

For political expediency and partisan interest, some have credited the Cedi recovery to:
1. Gold for Oil Policy spearheaded by Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia.
2. GoldBod Initiative spearheaded by Mahama’s government.
3. External Influences such as US-China Tariffs war and trade tensions.

However, it is important to state certain facts without any form of political interest as follows:

1. The “Gold for Oil” is not the same as “Gold for Reserves”.

“Gold for Oil” was implemented by Akufo-Addo’s government as a specific programme where gold was used to pay for oil imports with the sole objective of reducing foreign exchange dependency as well as ensure the stabilization of fuel prices on the Ghanaian market. That is, domestically produced gold in Ghana was used to pay for oil imports instead of using foreign currency especially US Dollars.

The net effect of “Gold for Oil” policy reduce dependence on foreign trading currencies for oil imports, reduce the impact of exchange rate fluctuations on fuel costs, and potentially ensure the stability of fuel prices on the domestic market.

In nutshell, Bawumia’s “Gold for Oil” was a specific policy aimed at providing solution to a specific economic challenge of Fuel Pricing Stability. That is, the policy was an innovative barter arrangement aimed at exchanging domestically procured gold for imported petroleum products thereby reducing the need for US Dollars to buy fuel from the world market. The Gold for Oil was a specific need for the Bulk Distribution Companies(BDCs), and the deal involved the Bank of Ghana purchasing gold from small-scale gold operators in Cedis, which the Central Bank then sells on the world market for US Dollars. The dollars realised from the sales was used by Bank of Ghana to purchase the oil or in some instances, swapped the gold for the oil.

On the other hand, “Gold for Reserves” is a continuous policy and comprehensive financial strategy implemented by Bank of Ghana and other Central Banks, aims at managing a country’s overall foreign exchange portfolio.

The rationale behind “Gold for Reserves” Policy is to provide a stable exchange rate regime (that is building foreign exchange reserves), stable store of value, buffer against inflation, investments-diversification, and act as a hedge against financial instability.

The “Gold for Reserves” policy has been in existence long before the introduction of “Gold for Oil Policy”, and both were running concurrently until the current Bank of Ghana Governor, Dr. Johnson Asiama announced the outright suspension of the “Gold for Oil” policy, citing:
(a). Policy implementation challenges
(c). Operational challenges
(d). Financial losses to the State.

It is important to state that, the “Gold for Reserves” Policy is still in place and has always been in operations, and that, the recent GoldBod initiatives seems to only enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the operationalization of “Gold for Reserves” Policy of Bank of Ghana. With or without the GoldBod, the Bank of Ghana would still continue to operate its traditional “Gold for Reserves” Policy.

Was “Gold for Oil” Policy able to addressed the depreciation of the Cedi against the US Dollar and other trading currencies since its implementation from 2022 to March 2025? The answer to this question is BIG NO.

Was the “Gold for Oil” Policy able to ensures the stability of domestic fuel prices in Ghana between 2022-March 2025? The answer to this question is Partially Yes.

*Unbiased Verdict*
The recent appreciation of the Cedi against the US Dollar and other trading currencies are largely due to the following reasons:

1. Policy Reforms, Fiscal Policy Objectives, and Monetary Policy objectives of Mahama’s government.

2. Favorable global economic conditions especially the recent US-China trade tensions(Tariffs War between US and other countries especially in relation to China).
Both US and China are significant trading partners of Ghana.

3. Ongoing Fiscal Reforms(Fiscal discipline programme) under Ghana-IMF programme, and the credit has to be given to former President Akufo-Addo, Ken Ofori-Atta, former Minister of Finance, and Hon. Dr. Mohammed Amin Adam, former Minister of Finance.

It is without doubt that, the $ 3 billion IMF Extended Credit Facility has restored some considerable level of economic confidence, with an anticipated $370 million tranche hitting the account of Bank of Ghana soon.

For the records, Mahama ended his first term with IMF cushion from 2015-2016, and his second term too is being cushioned with IMF from 2025-2026.

4. Ongoing Ghana’s Debt Restructuring Programme, and the credit has to be given to former President Akufo-Addo, Ken Ofori-Atta, former Minister of Finance, and Hon. Dr. Mohammed Amin Adam, former Minister of Finance.

During the 2025 Budget Speech delivered on 11th March 2025, Hon. Dr. Ato Forson stated that, “Mr. Speaker, you may recall that the government(Akufo-Addo’s government) commenced the debt restructuring programme in 2022 to restore debt sustainability and economic stability. Mr. Speaker, as of now, the restructuring process is approximately 93 percent completed completed. The remaining 7 percent relates to debt of US$2.7 billion owed to commercial creditors. We(Mahama’s government) are committed to completing the remaining debt restructuring as soon as possible”(Sections 101, 102 & 103 and Pages 23-24 of the 2025 Budget Speech).

It is very worthy to state that, the Ghana’s debt restructuring has provided a necessary vital breathing room for Mahama’s government, with the next major payment due in July 2025.

5. The recent S&P Global Ratings Upgrade of Ghana’s credit status from selective default to CCC+, and the credit has to be given to President John Mahama, and Hon. Dr. Ato Forson, Minister of Finance.

6. The recent direct market interventions by the Bank of Ghana, in the forex injection of $490 million in April 2025, and the credit has to be given to Dr. Johnson Asiama, Governor of Bank of Ghana.

7. World market pricing of Ghana’s gold at $ 3, 400 per ounce, and cocoa at $ 10, 000 per ton.

8. Establishment and operationalization of the Ghana Gold Board(GoldBod) even though UP Tradition Institute still has some strong reservations about the monopolistic creation of the GoldBod.

9. The decline of the US Dollar Index(DXY) leading to the weakening of the dollar against other trading currencies.

10. The increased gold reserves of Bank of Ghana, valuing at approximately $3.6 billion by 30th April 2025 kind courtesy the combined positive effects of “Gold for Reserves” Policy(with credit to Bank of Ghana), suspended “Gold for Oil” Policy(with credit to Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia), and the operations of the GoldBod(with credit to President John Mahama, especially the requirements that, 20% of gold export proceeds should be converted to Ghana Cedis before dollar exchange as well as the decision of Mahama’s government through GoldBod to purchase 20% of gold from large-scale mining companies).

The recent recovery of the Cedi is a combination of several factors, and therefore, it is very pedestrian for anyone to single out one initiative as the causality of the Cedi appreciation.

Based on the available facts and data, it fair to state that:
1. Mahama’s government(President John Mahama, Hon. Ato Forson, Minister of Finance, and Dr. Johnson Asiama, Governor of Bank of Ghana) contributed 50% to the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

2. Akufo-Addo’s government(President Akufo-Addo, Hon. Ken Ofori-Atta, Hon. Mohammed Amin Adam, and Governor Ernest Addison) contributed 25% to the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

3. IMF-Ghana Programme, and CCC+ credit status of Ghana by S&P Global Ratings contributed 15% to the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

4. Favorable Global Economic conditions such as US-China Tariffs war contributed about 9% to the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

5. “Gold for Oil” Policy and other domestic factors contributed about 0.5-1% to the recent appreciation of the Cedi.

Therefore, the role of the suspended “Gold for Oil” Policy to the recent Cedi appreciation is highly insignificant on a scale of 100%.

In conclusion, to safeguard the sustainable appreciation of the Cedi against the US Dollar and other trading currencies, the UP Tradition Institute would like to respectfully recommend to the Mahama’s government or future government of the New Patriotic Party(NPP) to consider the:
1. Enactment of “Ghana Gold Reserve Act” under the direct control and supervision of the Bank of Ghana.

The “Ghana Gold Reserve Act” would protect the currency system of Ghana, provides guidelines/regulations for the better use of the monetary gold stock at the Bank of Ghana.

The operations/functionality of the “Ghana Gold Reserve Act” would NOT be the same as the Ghana Gold Board(GoldBod). The GoldBod would contribute to the “Gold for Reserves” Policy whereas the “Ghana Gold Reserve Act” would ensure the proper international best practices as far as the monetary use of gold stock at Bank of Ghana is concerned.

2. Establish the “Exchange Stabilization Fund(ESF)” under the “Ghana Gold Reserve Act”, to control the value of foreign currencies in relation to the performance of the Cedi.

3. Amend the Foreign Exchange Act, 2006(Act 723) to include the authority of the President of the Republic of Ghana to establish the gold value of the dollar or any foreign currency by proclamation through the Ministry of Finance without unnecessary approval from the Bank of Ghana.

……Signed….
Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)
Founding President, UP Tradition Institute.

Atwima Mponua NDC Constituency Chairman, Haruna Salifu, popularly known as Chairman Kutu, has categorically denied allegations of involvement in illegal mining (galamsey) following a viral video that accused him of the illicit activity.

In response to the false allegations, Chairman Kutu has taken decisive legal action against Amaro Shakur, the publisher of the video, seeking damages of GH₵ 1,500,000.

According to the writ filed by Chairman Kutu, the defendant’s statements were false and damaging to his reputation.

The plaintiff claims that the publications were defamatory and have caused harm to his personal and professional life.

As a result, Chairman Kutu is seeking several reliefs, including a declaration that the defendant’s publications are defamatory, an order for the defendant to retract the publication on his social media platforms, a public apology from the defendant, and an order restraining the defendant from publishing further falsehoods against him.

While debunking the allegations, Chairman Kutu reaffirmed his support for the government’s efforts to combat illegal mining.

He urged the public to disregard the falsehoods against his person and emphasized the need for collective action to protect the environment and natural resources.

Chairman Kutu’s commitment to fighting galamsey is evident in his actions, as he has consistently advocated for responsible mining practices and supported initiatives that promote sustainable development.

As a champion of environmental protection, Chairman Kutu’s decision to take legal action against the publisher serves as a deterrent to those who seek to spread false information and damage the reputation of others.

As the NDC Constituency Chairman, he remains committed to working with the government and other stakeholders to address the challenges of illegal mining and promote development in the Atwima Mponua constituency.

SikkaNews
Kwame Asare

The spoken words of a poor person should be devoid of arrogance, and the spoken words of a rich/wealthy person should be devoid of pride.

The poor should demonstrate humility in his/her submissions, and the rich/wealthy should demonstrate meekness & tolerance in his/her responses.

Both the rich and poor have the right to speak but their respective utterances should be seasoned with salt and guided by responsibility.

The weak should respect the strong, and the strong should protect the weak.

The young person should honour the elderly, and the elderly should appreciate the young person.

The wife should submit to the husband, and the husband should love the wife.

The subordinate should protect the interest of the Boss, and the Boss should elevate the subordinate.

It is as simple as that.

To protect the public image of our NPP, let’s avoid needless accusations and counter-responses.

Issued By: Razak Kojo Opoku (PhD)

SikkafmNews