The Minority Caucus in the Parliament has launched a robust critique of the government over what it describes as the mismanagement and unconstitutional handling of the District Assemblies Common Fund (DACF), warning that delays, underfunding, and executive overreach threaten the very principles of decentralisation and local development in the country.

Speaking at a press conference in Accra, the Minority Chief Whip, Frank Annoh-Dompreh, emphasised that the caucus’ concerns extend beyond partisan politics, framing the issue as a matter of constitutional governance and democratic accountability.

He noted that the integrity of public finance and the supremacy of Parliament in resource allocation are under threat from recent ministerial directives.

Conflict Over 2025 DACF Guidelines

At the centre of the debate are the 2025 Ministerial Guidelines for the Utilisation of the DACF, issued by the Ministry of Local Government and approved by Cabinet.

According to the Minority Caucus, these guidelines contradict the DACF formula approved by Parliament for 2025.

The Parliamentary Formula, which allocates GHS 7.51 billion for the fiscal year, is designed to distribute funds based on a carefully structured model that accounts for location, developmental need, equality, and service pressures. It aims to ensure that districts with greater deprivation receive proportionately more resources, thereby promoting equitable development across the 261 Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs).

In contrast, the Ministerial Guidelines impose fixed national percentages for projects such as 24-hour economy markets, CHPS compounds, school blocks, boreholes, sanitation, administration, and legacy projects.

The Minority argued that these percentages are neither supplementary nor interpretative of the Parliamentary Formula but effectively replace it, creating a parallel allocation system that undermines constitutional authority.

Constitutional And Legal Concerns

Frank Annoh-Dompreh pointed to Article 252 of the 1992 Constitution, which vests Parliament with exclusive authority to determine the DACF formula. Section 126(1) of the Local Governance Act, 2016 (Act 936), permits a Minister to issue utilisation guidelines but only within the framework set by Parliament.

By introducing new expenditure categories and percentages, the Ministerial Guidelines exceed this mandate, amounting to ultra vires action.

“The DACF formula is not arbitrary; it is data-driven and empirically structured to address real needs in districts across the country. When executive directives overwrite Parliament’s formula, equity is replaced by rigidity, and decentralisation is weakened,” Annoh-Dompreh said.

Impact on Local Communities

The Minority Caucus highlighted the tangible consequences of these deviations:

Equity compromised: Uniform percentages ignore the varying needs of urban and rural districts, Local autonomy curtailed: Assemblies are reduced to implementing centrally mandated projects, limiting local planning.

Administrative confusion: Conflicting directives between the Parliamentary Formula and Ministerial Guidelines disrupt procurement, budgeting, and risk legal exposure for officers.

Persistent DACF Arrears

The caucus also expressed concern over chronic underfunding of the DACF. Despite constitutional provisions guaranteeing at least 5% of total national revenue for the fund, historical transfers from the Annual Budget Funding Amount (ABFA) have consistently fallen below this threshold — 1.74% in 2021 and 2.39% in 2022, according to Public Interest and Accountability Committee (PIAC) reports.

While the NPP-led government, which left office in 2025, worked to settle arrears dating back to 2014–2016, the current NDC administration has made little progress in addressing remaining obligations.

DACF arrears for 2024 alone are estimated at GHS 7.33 billion, leaving projects stalled, contractors unpaid, and communities deprived of essential services.

The Minority highlighted a stark contrast in government priorities: in early 2025, statutory funds such as the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund) and National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) received GH¢2.71 billion and GH¢2.03 billion respectively, while DACF transfers remained insufficient to meet constitutional requirements.

Calls For Action

Frank Annoh-Dompreh and the Minority Caucus proposed several measures to restore constitutional compliance and strengthen decentralised governance:

Immediate alignment of DACF Guidelines with the Parliamentary Formula.

Automatic revenue-based computation, ensuring at least 5% of national revenue is allocated to DACF without delay.

Structured arrears resolution, including an independent audit and medium-term repayment plan.

Enhanced parliamentary oversight, with quarterly reporting and penalties for non-compliance.

Transparency measures, such as DACF compliance dashboards accessible to the public.

Long-term structural safeguards, including possible constitutional amendments to entrench automatic DACF transfers and prevent discretionary delays.

A Constitutional Imperative

In his closing remarks, Annoh-Dompreh stressed that the issue transcends technical financial management.

“The DACF is not merely another line item in the budget; it is the heartbeat of decentralised development, a covenant between the State and the people that no district should be left behind,” he said.

He warned that the continued underfunding of DACF undermines Ghana’s decentralisation architecture, stalls local development, and erodes public trust.

The Minority Caucus reaffirmed its commitment to defending constitutional governance, holding the executive accountable, and ensuring that every district—from Zabzugu to Jomoro, from Dormaa to Keta—receives the resources guaranteed under the law.

“This is not opposition to development,” Frank Annoh-Dompreh concluded. “This is opposition to illegality. This is a defence of the Constitution, of equitable development, and of the rights of every Ghanaian citizen.”