Private legal practitioner, Mr. Dawda Eric has filed a complaint against the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) at the Right to Information Commission (RIC) for withholding critical details regarding a pending information request.
The petition challenges the board’s persistent refusal to grant access to specific operational data requested since November 24, 2025.
This escalation follows a lackluster response from GoldBod to the RIC on January 21, 2026, wherein the board attempted to justify its non-compliance and continued delay.
The legal practitioner contends that the state entity’s stance is a direct affront to the “statutory period for timely response” mandated by law, raising serious questions about the “deliberate withholding” of information that belongs in the public domain.
“GoldBod’s delay and deliberate withholding of certain details point(s) to the fact that, there are things they are hiding from the public domain. That conduct breaches the constitution and the Right to Information Act, 2019 Act 989. Let me also stress the fact that, both the RTI Commission and the Ghana GoldBod slept on my request until i moved to court in an action for Mandamus to compel them to do what is right in accordance with law.”
Mr. Dawda Eric
The standoff between the legal practitioner and the regulatory body underscores a deepening crisis of accountability in Ghana’s extractive governance.
Under the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989), public institutions are required to process requests within specific timelines, yet GoldBod’s actions suggest an attempt to bypass these legislative guardrails.
Mr. Dawda Eric emphasized that this access is not a privilege but a “constitutional right of every citizen” anchored in Article 21(1)f of the 1992 Constitution.
The situation reached a breaking point when the RIC was forced to intervene, demanding that GoldBod provide “justification for the delay” and the subsequent “refusal to grant” access.
This latest complaint suggests that the board’s January 21 explanation was insufficient, prompting the practitioner to seek further redress to ensure the board does not remain “above the law” in its dealings.
Extractive Governance and the Reputation Risk
The refusal of GoldBod to remain transparent regarding its internal mechanics poses a significant threat to its institutional reputation.
In the global mining industry, where “traceability and ethical sourcing” are the current gold standards, any hint of opacity from a national regulator can be interpreted as a red flag for corruption or mismanagement.
When a statutory body is perceived as “hiding things,” it erodes the confidence of international investors and local stakeholders who rely on accurate data for market stability.
This “deliberate withholding of details” creates a narrative of institutional rot that can deter the very formalization and foreign exchange accumulation that GoldBod was established to promote.
Without open disclosure, the board risks being categorized among the “opaque extractive regimes” that historically hinder African economic growth.
Furthermore, the delay in providing information suggests a systemic failure in the board’s commitment to “best corporate governance practices.”
In a sector where public trust is already fragile due to the complexities of artisanal mining and revenue leakage, GoldBod’s defiance of RTI timelines suggests a lack of “administrative integrity.”
By forcing a legal practitioner to seek a “Mandamus to compel” action, the board portrays itself as a reluctant participant in the democratic process.
Strengthening Accountability via the RIC Intervention
The current petition to the Right to Information Commission (RIC) is a vital tool for re-establishing the “chain of accountability” within the extractive sector.
The RIC serves as the primary enforcement mechanism for Act 989, and its ability to penalize non-compliant institutions is essential for curbing “institutional arrogance.”
By dragging GoldBod before this commission, Mr. Dawda Eric is effectively testing the strength of Ghana’s transparency laws against a powerful state-owned enterprise.
This action ensures that the board’s dealings are subject to “independent scrutiny” rather than being shielded by internal administrative walls.
Ultimately, this case serves as a precedent for other citizens and extractive experts to demand “real-time transparency.”
This move is expected to flush out any potential “conflicts of interest” or financial discrepancies that the board might be shielding.
By holding GoldBod to the “statutory response period,” the petition reinforces the idea that no entity is exempt from the constitutional mandate of providing information that facilitates “public oversight and good governance.”
READ ALSO: NPP Bigger than any Individual – Akufo-Addo Preaches Unity @Peace Pact
