Following PURC’s announcement of a 2.45% increase in electricity tariffs across all consumer categories effective July 1, some civil Society Organisations have criticised the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (PURC) for its recent decision.
In a joint statement, CUTS International Accra and the Centre for Environmental Management and Sustainable Energy (CEMSE) accused PURC of violating Section 3(c) of Act 538 of 1997, which mandates fair utility pricing for the mutual benefit of government, producers and end-users.
They argue that the Commission’s decision ignores key macroeconomic improvements that should have translated into relief for consumers.
The CSOs point to the Ghanaian cedi’s over-30% appreciation between the first and second quarters of 2025 – from GH¢15.70 to GH¢10.31 per US dollar – which they say generated a GH¢1billion windfall for government and utility providers.
They maintain the surplus could have been used to clear arrears or reduce consumer costs, rendering the tariff hike unjustifiable.
They also criticised PURC for relying on an outdated inflation rate of 20.67%, rather than the current 18.4%; noting that falling inflation lowers operational costs and should benefit consumers.
Further, the CSOs questioned PURC’s justification of GH¢488million in arrears – pointing out the Commission’s failure to explain how the cedi appreciation windfall was utilised.
Most importantly, the CSOs accused PURC of excluding stakeholders from the decision-making process; particularly by introducing fuel costs and reserve margins into the tariff without public disclosure or consultation.
They also questioned the lack of transparency regarding a 27% fuel cost component for which no data, simulations or procurement details were shared.
Obviously, this recent tariff adjustment by PURC was arrived at without much stakeholder involvement, hence the push-back. As the regulator, we expect the Commission’s work to be above board to avoid such accusations of lacking transparency.
Consumers have been at the receiving end for far too long and it is good to see the CSOs question the recent increase’s rationale.
Greater stakeholder involvement would have curtailed this mistrust.
