Majority Chief Whip in Parliament, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has accused the International Monetary Fund (IMF) of showing political bias against the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government following the Fund’s latest assessment of governance in Ghana’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs).
Mr Dafeamekpor questioned what he described as the IMF’s tendency to criticise NDC governments over practices he believes were also prevalent under previous New Patriotic Party (NPP) administrations.
His comments followed an IMF Technical Assistance Report on Ghana’s SOEs, which identified the politicisation of board and chief executive appointments as a major weakness in the governance of state-owned enterprises.
The report said that although Ghana had established a framework intended to make appointments more structured and merit-based, “in practice appointments remain highly political and centralised in the Presidency.”
It also said boards of major SOEs were largely dominated by political appointees, with board chairs frequently being ministers, Members of Parliament or prominent party officials.
Dafeamekpor challenges IMF assessment.
Reacting in a post on X, the South Dayi MP questioned the basis for what he considered the IMF’s selective criticism of NDC administrations.
“So what exactly do these IMF Country Directors want from the NDC anytime we are in Govt?” he asked.
Mr Dafeamekpor said he had observed, “the alacrity with which the IMF criticises an NDC-Govt in respect of matters that they’ll actually facilitate for an NPP-Govt to implement.”
He cited the appointment of former NPP National Chairman Peter Mac Manu as Board Chairman of the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority (GPHA) and former NPP minister Hackman Owusu-Agyemang as Board Chairman of the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) under the Akufo-Addo administration.
“Obviously, the IMF didn’t know this and, of course, didn’t also [know] the political colouration nor rank of these men who led GPHA & Cocobod Boards at the time,” he said.
The Majority Chief Whip said he was prepared to provide evidence of political appointments to the boards of SOEs under previous NPP administrations.
“I wish to assure the IMF-Ghana Country officers that I can produce a full list of NPP Snr Ranks & MPs who served on every Board of every SOE within 2017 and 2024. I can also do so from 2001 to 2008,” he stated.
IMF report and the Mahama administration
The IMF report was published on September 9, 2026, but its treatment of SOE financial performance largely relies on data through 2024.
The report notes that SOE liabilities had risen to about GH¢282 billion, equivalent to roughly 25% of GDP, in 2024, with the largest fiscal risks concentrated in the Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG), Volta River Authority (VRA) and COCOBOD.
This means the report’s assessment of the 2024 financial performance and fiscal position of SOEs predates President John Dramani Mahama’s second administration, which began in January 2025.
However, the timing requires some qualification. The IMF says its technical assistance mission was conducted in Accra from November 24 to December 5, 2025, at the request of the Ministry of Finance, and the team held meetings with SIGA, the Ministry of Finance, the Audit Service and representatives of major SOEs, including GPHA, VRA, COCOBOD, ECG and GoldBod.
The governance section therefore contains some observations based on those later engagements. For instance, the IMF refers to a “newly inaugurated” GPHA board chaired by the national chairman of the governing party, while also noting the presence of prominent politicians alongside technocrats and a traditional leader on the VRA board.
The distinction is therefore between the report’s 2024 financial and performance data, which predate the current administration, and its broader governance observations, which were informed by the IMF’s later technical mission.
What the IMF says about political appointments
The Fund said Ghana was building a more structured and merit-based system for appointing SOE boards and chief executives, but that implementation remained incomplete.
It said the State Ownership Policy requires SIGA to develop a nomination framework to identify, vet and shortlist candidates for board and CEO positions.
However, the IMF said: “In practice, boards of major SOEs are largely dominated by political appointees, with board chairs frequently being ministers, members of parliament, or prominent party officials.”
It also criticised the process for appointing chief executives, saying boards had limited influence because CEOs or managing directors were typically appointed by the President, often in consultation with the relevant minister.
According to the Fund, this weakens the accountability relationship between boards and management and could encourage chief executives to respond more to political principals than to their boards.
The IMF recommended the introduction of merit-based selection procedures for SOE boards and executive management, beginning with macro-critical SOEs, as well as a gradual reduction in the number of active politicians and high-level officials serving on SOE boards.
Dafeamekpor questions IMF neutrality
Mr Dafeamekpor went further to accuse the IMF of abandoning neutrality in Ghana’s domestic political contest.
He linked his concerns to a previous IMF report on Ghana’s gold-related operations, which he also believes was unfair to the NDC administration.
“Mr IMF Country Director, by your tainted GoldBod report a couple of weeks prior and your present report in question, tells me without doubt that you have descended into the local political arena of conflict and taken sides opposite to me,” he wrote.
He added: “You must never be trusted again as an independent and neutral supra-national financial institution.”
The MP also criticised the Fund’s position on Ghana’s gold resources, declaring:
“As for our gold, ‘forgerrit’. We will no longer sell it to you. You can continue to fabricate & skew our country reports with a huge anti-NDC slant.”
He ended the post with the declaration: “GoldBod ad vitam!!!!”
SIGA report paints mixed picture of SOEs
The IMF’s concerns over governance come shortly after the State Interests and Governance Authority (SIGA) published its 2025 State Ownership Report, providing the latest assessment of the financial and operational performance of Ghana’s state-owned sector.
Unlike the IMF’s financial analysis based largely on 2024 data, the SIGA report covers the 2025 financial year, the first year of President Mahama’s second administration.
SIGA assessed 162 of the 175 approved specified entities, comprising 53 SOEs, 36 joint venture companies and 73 other state entities.
The report presents a significantly improved overall financial picture for the SOE sector. It says SOEs recorded a combined net profit after tax of GH¢19.80 billion in 2025, compared with a GH¢2.25 billion net loss in 2024, while aggregate revenue increased by 28.12% to GH¢176.43 billion.
However, the improvement was not universal.
SIGA reported that five SOEs — ECG, Ghana Cylinder Manufacturing Company, GNPA, Graphic Communications Group Company and Ghana Digital Centre — recorded losses every year from 2021 to 2025. It also identified other entities with persistent negative equity positions.
At the same time, several enterprises recorded sustained profitability. SIGA identified entities including GPHA, Bui Power Authority, Ghana National Gas Company, BOST Energies Company, the Minerals Income Investment Fund and TDC Company Limited among those that had remained profitable over the five years.
Governance remains central to SOE reform debate
The two reports therefore present different but related dimensions of the SOE debate.
The SIGA assessment points to a substantial improvement in aggregate financial performance in 2025, while also showing that some state-owned companies continue to make losses.
The IMF, meanwhile, focuses heavily on the structural and governance arrangements underpinning SOE performance, arguing that political influence, weak board independence, inadequate appointment procedures and poor oversight can undermine the ability of state enterprises to operate efficiently and protect public resources.
The Fund itself acknowledged that Ghana had made progress in strengthening SOE governance, including through the establishment of SIGA, the State Ownership Policy and a Corporate Governance Code. It nevertheless said implementation gaps remained.
The emerging debate, therefore, is not simply about whether Ghana’s SOEs are making or losing money, but also about how they are governed, who is appointed to oversee them and whether those appointments are based primarily on political affiliation or professional competence.
Mr Dafeamekpor’s response places that debate firmly within Ghana’s partisan political contest, while the IMF maintains that its recommendations are aimed at strengthening governance, accountability, fiscal risk management and the long-term financial sustainability of the state-owned sector.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source link
