News Guide Africa

Tag: Dr. Razak Kojo Opoku

Dr Razak Opoku’s Objective Assessment of Gold Trading Losses in Ghana

a). Specific Objectives of GoldBod:

1. To increase national foreign exchange reserves.

2. To stabilize the cedi.

3. To curb illegal gold smuggling.

b). Purported Losses at GoldBod:

$1.7 billion losses, reported by IMF.

c). Reasons for the $1.7 billion losses cited by IMF:

Losses caused by policy-related accounting cost or “quasi-fiscal” cost or trading shortfalls or transaction cost, and NOT as a result of direct cash loss or financial loss to the State.

Per page 10 of the report, “Losses accrued on gold trades are a combination of service and assay fees paid to GoldBod, discounts on gold sold to off-takers(exporters) and most importantly, exchange rate losses from the spread between the forex bureau rate paid to purchase gold and the cedi reference rate used for BoG(Bank of Ghana) accounting.”

Therefore, it is UNFAIR to soley blamed GoldBod for the $1.7 billion losses when Bank of Ghana is clearly in the picture.

d). Best Examples to Practically Explain the meaning of Policy-related Accounting Cost (“Quasi-Fiscal Cost”)

1. Government decision to spend about GH¢ 207 million on Fertilizer Subsidy, an amount which represents 50% price cut to benefit farmers.

2. Government decision to spend about GH¢ 25 billion on banking and financial sector clean-up exercise to protect the funds of depositors.

3. Government decision to offer a GH¢ 2 per litre cut (reduction) at the pumps to cushion consumers of petroleum products.

e). Is GoldBod Achieving its Specific Objective 1 (To Increase National Foreign Exchange Reserves):

Yes, but there is still room for improvements.

GoldBod has significantly contribute to the increase of the national foreign exchange reserves of Ghana, with estimated figure of about $10 billion.

Is it prudent strategy to lose $ 1.7 billion to attract a revenue of $10 billion? Yes or No answer.

Is there a better alternative gold trading policy for Ghana to raise $10 billion for the national foreign exchange reserves without the Country losing $1.7 billion as a result of policy-related accounting cost(quasi-fiscal cost)?

f). Is GoldBod Achieving its Specific Objective 2(To stabilize the Cedi):

Yes, so far there is relative stability of the cedi against the US Dollar and other major trading currencies since the introduction of the GoldBod initiatives.

However, there is still room for improvements.

We want to experience Ghana whereby $1 is equivalent to GH¢ 5, and also with the Cedi performing extremely better against other trading currencies.

g). Is GoldBod Achieving its Specific Objective 3 (To curb illegal gold smuggling):

Yes, but a lot more has to be done by GoldBod to completely eradicate gold smuggling.

According to the IMF, Ghana is estimated to have lost about $11.4 billion to gold smuggling between 2019 and 2024.

The discrepancy between gold exports reported by Ghana and imports recorded by the United Arab Emirates(UAE) exceeded $4 billion, according to the IMF Report.

$1.7 billion loss at Bank of Ghana caused by policy-related accounting cost versus $11.4 billion loss from 2019 to 2024 caused by gold smuggling, which of them should we be worried about the most as a citizens of Ghana?

h). Impact of GoldBod on the Activities of Galamsey

My major concerns are that:

1. what measures have GoldBod put in place to address galamsey activities in the country?, and also ensure that the GoldBod do not purchase gold from companies and individuals engaging in galamsey activities?

2. Is the operations of GoldBod significantly contributing to rising activities of galamsey in the Country?

3. How GoldBod has managed to reduce gold smuggling and by what estimate in terms of US Dollars?

i). Gold for Oil Programme and its losses from 2022-March 2025

The purposes of the Gold- for-Oil Programme(G4O) were:

1. To ease pressure on foreign exchange reserves.

2. Stabilize domestic fuel prices.

However, according to Bank of Ghana, the Gold-for-Oil(G4O) programme incurred financial losses of about GHS 2.43 billion, with the termination of the G4O programme in March 2025.

The net loss on gold trading for Gold-for-Reserves(G4R) and Gold-for-Oil(G4O) for 2024 was estimated to be around GHS 5.66 billion(approximately GHS 5.7 billion).

Conclusion

Bank of Ghana in trading partnership with Ghana Gold Board(GoldBod) has incurred a policy-related accounting costs of $1.7 billion according to the IMF, and this cost is not as result of directly losing cash(financial losses). However, this $1.7 billion loss is better compared to losing $11.4 billion between 2019-2024 to gold smuggling.

Both for Gold-for-Oil(G4O) and Gold-for-Reserves(G4R) incurred financial loss of GHS 5.7 billion but the question is that, were the policies of G4O and G4R able to achieved its intended purposes of currency stability, fuel prices stabilization, and prevention or reduction of gold smuggling?

As a Country, should we reverse to Gold-for-Oil(G4O) or Gold-for-Reserves(G4R) or maintain the Ghana Gold Board(GoldBod)?

…signed…

Razak Kojo Opoku(PhD)

August 20, 2026
Understanding Ghana’s $1.7bn Gold Trading Losses: Policy cost, not stolen cash

Following widespread public debate over the financial performance of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) and the Bank of Ghana (BoG), economic analysts are urging citizens to distinguish between policy-related accounting adjustments and direct financial theft.

The conversation surrounding Ghana’s central bank gold purchasing initiatives reached a fever pitch following reports referencing International Monetary Fund (IMF) data, which cited approximately $1.7 billion in cumulative losses associated with state gold trading strategies.

However, closer inspection of the data reveals a far more nuanced economic picture.

Demystifying the $1.7 Billion Accounting Cost

According to page 10 of the recent IMF report, the reported $1.7 billion figure does not represent stolen funds or direct cash missing from state coffers. Instead, the loss reflects “quasi-fiscal” or policy-related accounting costs.

“Losses accrued on gold trades are a combination of service and assay fees paid to GoldBod, discounts on gold sold to off-takers, and most importantly, exchange rate losses from the spread between the forex bureau rate paid to purchase gold and the cedi reference rate used for BoG accounting,” stated policy expert Dr. Razak Kojo Opoku in an objective assessment published this week.

Dr. Opoku explained that quasi-fiscal costs are routine government trade-offs designed to achieve larger socio-economic benefits.

“Think of it like the GH¢ 207 million spent on fertilizer subsidies to offer a 50% price cut to farmers, the GH¢ 25 billion spent on the financial sector clean-up to protect depositors, or fuel tax cuts at the pump,” Dr. Opoku noted. “These are deliberate accounting decisions made to absorb shocks on behalf of the public, not money lost to corruption. It is unfair to solely blame GoldBod when the central bank’s accounting framework is central to the picture.”

Evaluating Core Objectives: Reserves, Cedi, and Smuggling

GoldBod was established with three primary mandates: boosting national foreign exchange reserves, stabilizing the cedi, and curbing illegal gold smuggling.

● Foreign Exchange Reserves: Ghana’s national reserves have surged significantly, gaining an estimated $10 billion through central bank gold accumulation programs. Analysts argue that incurring a $1.7 billion accounting cost to secure $10 billion in liquid reserve buffers represents a defensible strategic trade-off, though experts question whether a less costly alternative exists.

● Cedi Stability: The cedi has experienced relative stability against the US Dollar and other major foreign currencies since GoldBod’s interventions matured. However, stakeholders note that further structural work is needed to drive the exchange rate down toward a target of GH¢ 5 to $1.

● Curbing Smuggling: The IMF estimates that Ghana lost roughly $11.4 billion to illicit gold smuggling between 2019 and 2024, with reported Ghanaian exports and United Arab Emirates (UAE) recorded imports showing a discrepancy exceeding $4 billion.

“As Ghanaian citizens, we must ask ourselves which issue demands greater national concern: a $1.7 billion accounting cost incurred to build reserves, or the $11.4 billion lost directly to unrecorded gold smuggling over five years?” Dr. Opoku questioned.

Environmental Concerns and the Galamsey Threat

Despite progress on trade balances, major questions remain regarding GoldBod’s environmental impact. Chief among public concerns is whether GoldBod’s purchasing network inadvertently incentivizes illegal small-scale mining (galamsey).

“Critical questions must be answered by GoldBod management,” Dr. Opoku emphasized. “What stringent verification measures are in place to ensure GoldBod does not buy gold from companies or individuals engaged in galamsey? Is the expansion of official buying channels inadvertently fueling illegal mining on the ground?”

The Legacy of Gold-for-Oil (G4O)

The evaluation comes on the heels of the formal termination of the Gold-for-Oil (G4O) program in March 2025. Designed to ease forex pressure and stabilize domestic pump prices, Bank of Ghana records show G4O incurred direct financial losses of roughly GH¢ 2.43 billion over its run.

Combined, the Gold-for-Oil (G4O) and Gold-for-Reserves (G4R) initiatives registered a total net trading loss of approximately GH¢ 5.7 billion in 2024 alone.

As Ghana navigates its post-G4O landscape, policymakers face a critical decision: should the country revert to legacy mechanisms like G4O and G4R, or refine the operations of the Ghana Gold Board to eliminate accounting losses while protecting environmental standards? While the $1.7 billion IMF loss reflects the high price of currency intervention, citizens and analysts alike agree that permanent success depends on stopping galamsey at the source and closing the $11.4 billion smuggling drain for good.

August 20, 2026
RTI exemptions bar release of NLA-KGL report to media – Political Strategist opines

Public commentary surrounding the Right to Information (RTI) request for the Interministerial Committee Report on the National Lottery Authority (NLA) and KGL Technology Limited deal has drawn strong pushback from political strategist and academic Dr. Razak Kojo Opoku.

Dr. Opoku has criticized investigative outlet The Fourth Estate for pushing to access the report, arguing that statutory exemptions under the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989) explicitly restrict the disclosure of active government deliberations and sensitive commercial negotiations.

According to Dr. Opoku, KGL Technology Limited, the primary private entity involved in the renegotiations, has not even received a copy of the report, despite formal applications submitted to state authorities.

“KGL Technology Limited, which is directly the main subject of the review and renegotiation of its contracts with the National Lottery Authority, does NOT even have a copy of the Interministerial Committee Report,” Dr. Opoku stated. “This implies that KGL is doing financial renegotiations with government without a copy of and access to the Interministerial Committee Report on the NLA-KGL deal.”

He emphasized that ongoing discussions between the state and KGL are governed directly by directives issued by the Executive.

“The ongoing financial renegotiations between government and KGL are strictly guided by the letter issued by the Office of the President dated 7th April 2026 under the signature of the Secretary to the President, Callistus Mahama (PhD),” Dr. Opoku explained. “So, if KGL… has NO copy of the Interministerial Committee Report, why must Fourth Estate, which was not copied and also NOT even a party to the review and renegotiations of the NLA-KGL deal, be given a copy simply because of the RTI Act?”

Citing specific provisions of Act 989, Dr. Opoku outlined why the document remains legally protected from public disclosure, pointing to Sections 5, 6, 10, 11, and 13, which safeguard presidential advice, cabinet deliberations, trade secrets, and state negotiation strategies.

“NOT all information can be given or accessed under the Right to Information Act, 2019,” Dr. Opoku asserted. “Under Section 10, information is exempt where it contains trade secrets, financial or technical information, or procedures and instructions relating to negotiations being carried on by or on behalf of the State, the disclosure of which could affect the integrity or stability of the financial system or cause disruption of business.”

Dr. Opoku further rejected arguments invoking the public interest override under Section 17 of the Act, stating that the underlying contracts have already been confirmed as legal by state authorities.

“The contracts have been accepted by government as legal per the official letter issued by the Office of the President,” he noted. “They do NOT pose an imminent and serious threat to public safety, health, or morals, nor do they involve a miscarriage of justice or an abuse of authority.”

Calling for a deeper understanding of information access laws among media practitioners, Dr. Opoku urged journalists to thoroughly examine statutory limitation clauses before pursuing RTI requests for active state negotiations.

“Journalists should understand that before you write an application to access information under Section 18, make sure that you are clearly well educated to the fullest understanding and appreciation of Sections 5 to 17 of the same RTI Act,” Dr. Opoku concluded.

August 3, 2026
Presidential Committee’s findings contradict Fourth Estate claims on NLA-KGL deal – former NLA Official

By News Desk

A fierce war of words has erupted following a public statement issued by the former Head of Public Relations at the National Lottery Authority, Dr. Razak Kojo Opoku, who has vehemently accused investigative media outlet The Fourth Estate of peddling “barefaced lies” and “misleading the public” regarding the ongoing review of the National Lottery Authority (NLA) and KGL Group partnership agreement.

The prominent political and social commentator argues that, recent claims by the media house suggesting that a government-instituted committee’s findings validate their previous reportage are entirely false, malicious, and a calculated attempt to twist facts.

The Core of the Dispute

The controversy stems from a series of publications by The Fourth Estate which heavily criticized the NLA-KGL deal, labeling it “terrible” and aggressively demanding its immediate termination.

In a sharp rebuttal, Dr. Opoku pointed out that in the interest of transparency, the President of the Republic ordered a committee to investigate the matter. However, the committee’s final directive fundamentally contradicted the media house’s agenda. Rather than canceling the contract, the committee recommended a stay of execution and a structured renegotiation of the financial terms to maximize benefits for the state.

“The Fourth Estate, right from the beginning, had been calling for the abrogation of the NLA-KGL deal,” Dr. Opoku stated. “However, this description has never been backed with any reasonable conclusion or substantial evidence by the Fourth Estate or its surrogates.”

“Why the Backtracking?”

Dr. Opoku questioned why The Fourth Estate is now allegedly attempting to align its previous narrative with the committee’s actual findings, calling out the media organization for what he described as a lack of professional integrity.

“The Fourth Estate maliciously and mischievously labelled the KGL-NLA deal as terrible and called for the abrogation of the deal. It never called for renegotiation,” Dr. Opoku argued. “Why the backtracking? Why not be truthful? We expected that, if not for cheap sentimentalism and parochialism, the Fourth Estate would have rendered an unqualified apology to KGL.”

He further noted that the media house’s lack of relevance to the actual governance process is evident in their exclusion from the official proceedings.

“Again, if the Fourth Estate were that consequential, it would have been considered as part of the ongoing renegotiation. No one at the Fourth Estate or among its surrogates can pressure the Committee, which has the mandate, to rush and interfere with its professional work,” he added.

Renegotiations Strictly Commercial, Not for Social Media

The statement emphasized that all parties involved in the NLA-KGL agreement are actively engaged in a lawful, structured process aimed at securing Ghana’s economic interests. Dr. Opoku warned that state-level commercial agreements cannot be influenced by media campaigns or public sensationalism.

“Renegotiations are NOT done on social media or at the headquarters of the Fourth Estate,” Dr. Opoku maintained. “This is an important national exercise, devoid of sensationalism, propaganda, and the twisting of narratives. All parties sincerely appreciate the urgency of this important renegotiation, but this is strictly a legal and commercial agreement that must adhere to the legal rights of each party.”

Defense of Indigenous Businesses

Concluding his remarks, Dr. Opoku defended the track record of KGL Group, a major corporate entity and a prominent headline sponsor of Ghana’s national football team, the Black Stars. He criticized The Fourth Estate and its parent organization, the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), accusing them of routinely trying to dismantle local corporate successes.

“KGL is fully committed to the Republic and will never waste its time on those who seek to undermine and destroy indigenous businesses, as is the habit of the Fourth Estate and the Media Foundation for West Africa,” Dr. Opoku concluded.

At the time of going to press, the leadership of The Fourth Estate had not yet issued a formal response to Dr. Opoku’s blistering critique.

June 24, 2026