The Africa Centre for Energy Policy has offered a detailed explanation of its concerns regarding government’s intention to acquire Springfield Exploration and Production Limited’s interest in the West Cape Three Points Block 2.
ACEP’s Executive Director, Benjamin Boakye, says his position is not rooted in resistance to indigenous participation, but in the need for clear legal boundaries and sound regulatory practice.
He argued that the concern lies elsewhere and centres on what the law permits when a private company incurs losses in a risky venture.
“No law allows the state to absorb private sector losses, whether local or foreign, especially when the evidence shows the venture is risky and likely to cost the country.”
Benjamin Boakye, ACEP’s Executive Director
Benjamin Boakye, explained that the think tank has maintained a constructive relationship with the Minister of Energy and Green Transition and has observed noticeable improvements in policy coordination during his tenure.
Although the organisation recognises the Minister’s record, its reservations about the planned acquisition remain firm.
He noted that “we have had open and honest engagement with him since he assumed office” and added that the institution’s influence on policy has grown in the past year.
He recalled that the Minister and the Minister of Finance trusted ACEP to lead negotiations with Independent Power Producers, a process that produced savings of about two hundred and fifty million dollars on the country’s existing debt and more than seven billion dollars across the full life of the revised agreements.
Questions Over Regulator Oversight
A key part of ACEP’s argument involves the ongoing technical work of the Petroleum Commission.
The think tank considers the Commission the legally mandated independent body with a long institutional history.
“The Petroleum Commission is the legally mandated independent regulator with more than a decade of institutional history.
“If the government doubts its independence, or the Commission itself cannot assert it, then we have a much bigger governance problem.”
Benjamin Boakye, ACEP’s Executive Director
He explained that the Commission has indicated more than once that Springfield has not submitted complete raw data for a proper assessment of the field.
He stressed that “if the regulator is not satisfied, its evaluation remains inconclusive. Full stop.” The appropriate course, he said, was to allow the Commission to deliver its conclusion, which the industry could then examine, accept or challenge.
He warned that permitting a private company to bypass an incomplete regulatory process because it dislikes the likely outcome would weaken the broader oversight structure that governs the petroleum sector.
He said that doing so would “undermine the entire regulatory ecosystem and weaken the authority of the Commission over all sector players.”
Calls for Completion of the Regulatory Process
The think tank maintains that the path forward is straightforward.
“Bring in a new consultant, paid with state funds before the regulator completes its job, weakens institutional control and undermines the state’s ability to manage the petroleum sector.”
Benjamin Boakye, ACEP’s Executive Director
At present, he noted that every analysis available, apart from those of Springfield and GNPC, contradicts the claim that the block is commercially viable.
He concluded that the most responsible next step is to allow the regulator to finish its work.
“The solution is simple: give the regulator full access to the raw data and allow it to finish its work.
“If any party disagrees, the remedies lie in law, not political shortcuts.”
Benjamin Boakye, ACEP’s Executive Director
ACEP’s latest statement adds to the growing scrutiny around the proposed acquisition and places renewed attention on regulatory procedure, governance standards and the need for evidence-based decision making in the management of Ghana’s upstream assets.
READ ALSO: Pearl Nkrumah Leads Access Bank’s Grand Eco-Mission for Cedi @60 Celebration
