The government’s sudden withdrawal of the controversial Lithium Bill has triggered fresh political tension in Parliament, with the Minority Caucus celebrating the development as a major victory for accountability and a vindication of years of warnings about the mishandling of strategic minerals.

The decision adds to a long chain of disputes over the country’s approach to green minerals, particularly the Ewoyaa Lithium Project, which has been plagued by criticism, protests, and accusations of inconsistent governance.

A Bill Withdrawn After Months Of Pressure

The Lithium Bill, introduced as part of Ghana’s broader Green Minerals Policy under the new Ministry of Energy and Green Transition, was expected to serve as the country’s principal legislative framework for the exploitation of lithium and associated minerals.

However, the Minority, civil society organizations, environmental groups, and even traditional leaders from Ewoyaa and neighbouring communities opposed the bill, arguing it lacked clarity, transparency, and safeguards to ensure value addition and fair national benefit.

Their concerns were rooted in a broader historical context: Ghana’s extractive sector has long been criticized for agreements that offered disproportionately low returns to the state, from gold and manganese to oil and bauxite.

The Ewoyaa Lithium deal, signed in October 2023 between the government and Barari DV Ghana Limited, was described as a “game changer” at the time—but soon became one of the most criticized agreements in recent memory.

NDC’s Historic Opposition Resurfaces

The Minority’s renewed attack on the government draws heavily on the National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) earlier stance, especially its December 13, 2023 press statement, which condemned the original 10% royalty agreement with Barari.

The then-opposition NDC had described the 10% rate as “mediocre,” calling Parliament to reject the deal and demanding a complete overhaul of Ghana’s green mineral laws.

The party argued then that existing mining policies failed to benefit the country and warned against entering into agreements that did not ensure value addition—such as the construction of a mandatory chemical plant for processing lithium locally.

They emphasized that Ghana risked repeating the mistakes of its gold, oil, and bauxite sectors, where foreign companies dominated extraction while the country benefited minimally.

Now in government, their attempt to reduce the lithium royalty rate from 10% to 5%— has sparked nationwide outrage—reawakened accusations of inconsistency and betrayal.

The withdrawal of the bill is therefore being interpreted as a political retreat prompted by public pressure and the Minority’s sustained scrutiny.

Majority Eating Humble Pie

Speaking on the floor of Parliament, Minority Chief Whip and Member of Parliament for Nsawam-Adoagyiri, Frank Annoh-Dompreh, did not mince words.

“Mr Speaker, clearly our colleagues are eating humble pie,” he said. “We warned them. We told them that the path they were blazing was slippery. They refused to listen. But eventually, they are listening—beautiful.”

His remarks reflect the Minority’s position that the government’s missteps on the lithium deal have been avoidable.

The MP emphasised that lithium is a strategic mineral central to the global transition to renewable energy, noting that it accounts for over 70% of components used in solar batteries, electric vehicles, and storage systems.

He also drew on economic comparisons, observing that Ghana and Indonesia had similar economic profiles at independence, but Indonesia’s aggressive and strategic exploitation of green minerals has propelled its growth beyond Ghana’s.

A Trail of Previous Issues: Traditional Leaders, Civil Society, and Local Impact

The lithium saga is not new. Over the past two years, several controversies have rocked the Ewoyaa project:

Traditional Leaders Protest: Chiefs of Ewoyaa, Krampakrom, and surrounding communities rejected the proposed reduction of the royalty rate from 10% to 5%, describing it as a “shortchange” that threatens future development.

Lack of Consultation: Local leaders revealed they were made aware of the deal only after public notice of stakeholder consultations appeared in newspapers, fueling anger and mistrust.

Community Displacement and Livelihood Damage: Residents—mostly farmers—reported being displaced from farmlands even before full-scale mining began, raising environmental justice concerns.

Civil Society Opposition: Organizations such as ACEP, IMANI, Friends of the Nation, and the Africa Policy Lens repeatedly warned that Ghana risked losing hundreds of millions of dollars if the royalty rate was reduced.

Parliamentary Pressure

The Minority consistently demanded a more comprehensive legislative framework before any lithium exploitation, arguing that the government was rushing into deals without proper national benefit analysis.

These unresolved tensions provided the backdrop for the heated parliamentary exchanges that followed the bill’s withdrawal.

A Call for a New Roadmap

Annoh-Dompreh urged the government to use this pause to rethink Ghana’s approach to green minerals.

“When you bring the amended agreement back, we want to see a firm expression—value addition, local participation, and sustainable industrialisation,” he said. “For once, let lithium empower this country instead of becoming another resource curse.”

He suggested that Ghana should not merely export raw lithium ore but should manufacture accessories such as batteries and mobile phone components locally—an industrial revolution he says is long overdue.

What Next?

The National Democratic Congress government has yet to outline its next steps, but insiders say a revised bill will be reintroduced after stakeholder consultations.

However, the political temperature around the topic remains high, and the public is now alert to every move.