Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo Markin has intensified scrutiny of the Ghana Gold Board, questioning the commercial viability of an institution established to purchase and trade the country’s most valuable mineral resource while responding to reports of financial losses connected to Ghana’s gold purchasing operations. His latest criticism is directed particularly at GoldBod Chief Executive Officer Sammy Gyamfi, whose management of the institution has increasingly attracted political attention.
Speaking on Monday, August 17, 2026, Mr Afenyo Markin argued that an organisation operating within the international gold market should be capable of conducting its transactions profitably, especially considering the consistently high value of gold as a globally traded commodity. He therefore questioned the competence of any gold trader who purchases and subsequently sells the commodity at a loss.
“If you sell gold and make a loss, then you are not a good trader,” he remarked, in comments widely interpreted as a direct criticism of Mr Gyamfi and the manner in which GoldBod’s commercial activities are being managed.
The Minority Leader’s intervention comes at a time when the financial consequences of Ghana’s Domestic Gold Purchase Programme have become the subject of renewed public and political debate. The programme, which involves the Bank of Ghana purchasing domestically produced gold through GoldBod, was introduced as part of broader efforts to strengthen the country’s foreign exchange reserves and improve the management of Ghana’s gold resources.
The International Monetary Fund has previously identified a loss of approximately US$214 million in connection with the programme. GoldBod, however, has challenged the interpretation of that figure as a direct financial loss suffered by the institution itself, maintaining that the circumstances surrounding the reported amount require a more precise understanding of the programme’s financial structure.
Despite that distinction, Mr Afenyo Markin has continued to demand closer examination of GoldBod’s operations, arguing that the institution’s activities must be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny because of the enormous financial value attached to Ghana’s gold resources.
His concerns are not entirely new. In recent remarks, the Minority Leader cautioned Mr Gyamfi against dismissing criticism of GoldBod and urged the institution’s leadership to remain receptive to questions concerning its activities. He has also previously warned that unresolved concerns surrounding the Board could eventually develop into a major public scandal if the institution’s financial dealings and operational decisions are not carefully examined.
The latest dispute therefore places GoldBod at the centre of an increasingly intense political and economic debate over whether Ghana is obtaining sufficient financial returns from its gold resources and whether the country’s new approach to managing the precious mineral is delivering the commercial benefits promised by its architects.
The controversy also comes as GoldBod pursues broader reforms intended to strengthen oversight of the domestic gold market. The institution has announced plans to establish district gold buying centres in mining communities to improve transparency, monitoring and accountability in gold transactions.
At the same time, GoldBod has been advancing efforts to retain more value from Ghana’s gold within the domestic economy through local refining. In January 2026, GoldBod entered into an agreement with Gold Coast Refinery to process gold locally before export, representing an attempt to move Ghana beyond the longstanding practice of exporting significant quantities of gold in less processed form.
Consequently, the disagreement between Mr Afenyo Markin and Mr Gyamfi extends beyond a single allegation concerning financial losses. It reflects a broader contest over the effectiveness, transparency and commercial direction of Ghana’s evolving gold management framework, with the Minority Leader demanding greater accountability while GoldBod maintains that its reforms are designed to formalise the gold trade, strengthen domestic value addition and maximise the economic benefits derived from the country’s mineral wealth.
As political scrutiny intensifies, the financial performance of GoldBod and the precise circumstances surrounding the reported US$214 million loss are likely to remain central to public discussion, particularly as Parliament and other oversight institutions continue to examine how Ghana’s gold purchasing strategy is affecting the country’s reserves, public finances and broader economic objectives.
