The Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) has come under pressure to explain the termination of its Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Goldstream Global DMCC over a proposed US$1 billion investment to develop more than 300 responsible mines in Ghana.
Africa Policy Lens (APL), a policy reform initiative, is demanding full disclosure of the circumstances surrounding the termination, including the due diligence conducted before the agreement was signed and any financial commitments made by the State.
The demand follows GoldBod’s response to a Right to Information (RTI) request submitted on August 11, 2026, by Ing. Wisdom Edem Gomashie, a mining consultant and Senior Fellow of APL.
In its official response dated August 26, 2026, GoldBod confirmed that the agreement had been terminated because Goldstream Global DMCC failed to fulfil its obligations under the MoU.
“The Memorandum of Understanding entered into between GoldBod and Goldstream Global DMCC has been terminated. The termination followed the company’s failure to perform its obligations under the MoU,” GoldBod stated.
The Board further clarified that the terminated agreement should not be regarded as an ongoing commercial arrangement or as creating any current financial or operational obligation on its part.
However, in a press statement issued on Monday, October 12, 2026, and copied to THE ARCHIVES under its Gold Accountability Files, Part One, APL argued that GoldBod’s explanation left critical questions unanswered.
These include the circumstances surrounding the approval of the investment proposal, the obligations Goldstream failed to fulfil, and whether the failed arrangement exposed the State to any financial or operational risks.
$1bn Investment Announcement
GoldBod signed the MoU with Goldstream Global DMCC on August 22, 2025. The proposed initiative was subsequently announced by GoldBod Chief Executive Officer, Sammy Gyamfi, at the Mining and Minerals Convention in Accra on September 9, 2025.
The project generated considerable public interest because of its proposed US$1 billion investment and its stated objective of developing more than 300 responsible mines in Ghana.
However, GoldBod’s RTI response, as presented by APL, does not specify when the agreement was terminated, which particular obligations Goldstream failed to meet or the steps taken before the decision was reached.
It is also unclear whether the proposed investment progressed beyond the signing of the MoU, whether any funds were committed or whether GoldBod or other public institutions incurred expenditure in anticipation of the project.
APL Questions Due Diligence
APL is demanding answers about the financial, technical and operational assessments conducted before GoldBod entered into the arrangement.
The policy group wants GoldBod to explain what evidence it obtained regarding Goldstream’s capacity to mobilise the proposed US$1 billion investment and what monitoring mechanisms were established to ensure the company fulfilled its obligations.
It is also seeking clarification on whether GoldBod or any other public institution provided financial guarantees, incurred preparatory costs, made mineralised areas available or shared geological information in anticipation of the project.
Where such commitments were made, APL wants the Board to disclose their value and explain the measures taken to protect the State’s interests following the termination.
The group is further seeking information on whether the proposed arrangement contemplated gold offtake rights or other commercial benefits for Goldstream Global DMCC, and what safeguards were put in place to ensure Ghana obtained fair value from any such arrangement.
According to APL, GoldBod’s assurance that the terminated MoU creates no current financial or operational obligation does not, on its own, settle questions about possible historical expenditure or commitments.
Calls for Publication of MoU
In its call for greater transparency, APL is urging GoldBod to publish a comprehensive account of the circumstances surrounding the termination.
It wants the Board to disclose the due diligence undertaken, the obligations that were not fulfilled, the procedures followed in terminating the agreement and any financial or operational implications for the State.
APL is also demanding the publication of the executed MoU, relevant agreements, termination notices and associated records, subject to applicable legal exemptions, to facilitate independent public scrutiny.
The group maintains that the public deserves to know whether the proposed partnership created any financial exposure or obligations before it was discontinued.
Demands Oversight
While acknowledging that commercial agreements can fail for legitimate reasons, APL says the termination of the Goldstream arrangement should prompt broader scrutiny of how public institutions assess investors, approve strategic commercial agreements and monitor their implementation.
The group stresses that the termination itself does not establish wrongdoing but argues that major investment announcements should be matched by transparent reporting when the projects are discontinued.
It is therefore calling for stronger institutional standards covering due diligence, performance monitoring and timely public disclosure throughout the lifecycle of major commercial agreements involving public institutions.
“Ghana’s mineral resources must be governed by more than ambitious investment announcements. They require verifiable commitments, rigorous oversight, transparent implementation and accountability when agreements fail to deliver,” APL stated.
