Gold-for-Oil Programme Sparks Renewed Debate as Energy Analyst Dismisses IMANI Report
The integrity of Ghana’s controversial Gold-for-Oil (G4O) programme has returned to the spotlight after Energy Analyst and former NPP flagbearer aspirant, Kwadwo Poku, sharply criticised a recent report by policy think tank IMANI Africa.
Speaking on JoyNews’ AM Show on Monday, September 30, Mr Poku condemned IMANI’s claims, describing their analysis as “frivolous” and “lacking credibility.” He accused the Ghanaian public of increasingly entertaining sensational but baseless assertions.
“We should move away from a country of mediocrity to a country of seriousness,” he stated, adding: “Ghana is becoming a country where somebody wakes up in the morning and writes an article that pigs can fly, and journalists will start calling experts to ask if it’s true.”
IMANI’s “International Audit” Under Fire
At the heart of the dispute is IMANI’s reliance on what it described as a confidential forensic risk assessment of the G4O scheme by an unnamed multinational organisation. Mr Poku revealed he had reviewed the same document and found it unverifiable and misleading.
“IMANI said they reviewed an international audit. I have seen that audit—they did not mention who authored it or which organisation conducted it. If you read it, it’s frivolous,” he argued.
He directly challenged IMANI to disclose the source, stressing that the anonymous nature of the document undermines its legitimacy.
Defending Public Officials and the BoG
Mr Poku also defended top public servants linked to the G4O programme, warning that anonymous and unverified reports unfairly tarnish reputations.
He pointed out that the First Deputy Governor of the Bank of Ghana once headed the scheme, cautioning against defaming high-ranking officials without concrete evidence.
On claims of GH¢7.2 billion ($576 million) in potential losses cited in the report, Mr Poku dismissed the figure as a misrepresentation.
“This 7.2 billion they talk about—it’s not a loss. They use the phrase ‘potential loss.’ What is potential loss? How do you put that in the public domain for journalists to feed on?” he queried.
Tax Exemptions Are Industry Standard
The analyst also refuted claims that tax exemptions under the G4O initiative were a sign of malpractice. He explained that such exemptions predate the policy and remain standard practice in Ghana’s petroleum industry.
“Petroleum products are exempted and the taxes are recovered from consumers at the pump. GRA is in court with many OMCs and BDCs over these taxes—it’s a normal industry practice,” he clarified.
Call for Credible Policy Discourse
Reasserting his 24 years of industry experience, Mr Poku stressed that while civil society has a duty to hold government accountable, policy debates must be grounded in verifiable evidence.
“The document IMANI is relying on has no author, no institution, and its conclusions are false—100 percent false,” he insisted.
His remarks have deepened the national debate over the transparency and effectiveness of the G4O programme, amplifying calls for greater credibility and rigor in Ghana’s policy discussions.
Please download our HOTDIGITAL ONLINE APP and follow HotDigital Online on our social media platforms to stay updated on our upcoming initiatives.
#HotDigitalHealthAwareness #CommunityHealth #GhanaNursesAssociationUK #HealthMatters #HotDigitalOnline #StrongerTogether
