Omanhene blasts GIADEC Boss over selective justice in Bauxite deal

A growing storm is brewing within the extractive sector following sharp criticism of the Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Integrated Aluminum Development Corporation (GIADEC), Raindorf Twumasi Ankrah, over what has been described as “selective justice” in the handling of mining concessions.

The latest controversy was triggered by comments from broadcast journalist Omanhene Kwabena Asante, who questioned the consistency of government policy in reallocating strategic mining assets, particularly in the wake of the Damang mine transition process which went to Ibrahim Mahama, brother of President John Mahama.

He said that while government justified the abrogation of the Damang Goldfields contract on the basis of local participation, the subsequent reassignment of the concession to Ibrahim Mahama’s company, Engineers and Planners, E&P, raises serious questions about fairness, transparency, and consistency in policy implementation.

However supporters of the Damang bidding process maintain that the outcome reflects a merit-based assessment and therefore see no problem in the award of the concession to E&P.

Allegations Of Inconsistency And “Selective Empowerment”

Despite these justifications, critics argue that the broader implications of the decision raise concerns about fairness and equal opportunity within the mining sector.

Omanhene, in particular, described the situation as “deeply troubling,” suggesting that the principle of local participation should not be applied in a way that appears uneven.

He questioned whether replacing one operator with another — both Ghanaian — truly advances the policy objective of broad-based indigenous empowerment, referring to attempts to strip the Ghanaian operators of the bauxite mining.

“This is not indigenisation; this is selective empowerment,” he argued, warning that such perceptions could erode public confidence in regulatory institutions and weaken the credibility of reforms aimed at strengthening local ownership.

New Tensions Emerge In Bauxite Sector

Beyond Damang, concerns are now spilling into the bauxite industry, where the Ghana Integrated Aluminum Development Corporation oversees the development of an integrated aluminum value chain.

There are increasing claims within industry circles that similar patterns could be unfolding in the allocation and review of bauxite-related concessions. Some stakeholders allege that existing Ghanaian operators risk losing their rights under circumstances that mirror the Damang transition — potentially paving the way for a new dominant player.

Among the cases cited is that of businessman Isaac Ofori Poku, whose interests in the sector have reportedly come under scrutiny as part of ongoing reviews.

While no official confirmation has been made regarding any reassignment, the speculation has intensified debate about transparency and consistency in concession management.

In a sharply worded appeal, he called on the GIADEC chief executive to “immediately reverse what can only be described as dubious and self-serving decisions” and restore the concessions to what he termed their “rightful custodians.”

“We all applauded when the government moved to take over a foreign-managed concession in the name of empowering Ghanaians.

But how do you justify taking from one Ghanaian and handing it to another with clear political ties,” he queried.

Omanhene alleged that the perceived relationship between Ibrahim Mahama and Raindorf Twumasi Ankrah, GIADEC chief executive raises legitimate concerns about conflict of interest and behind-the-scenes manoeuvring aimed at sidelining existing indigenous operators.

He warned that failure to address these concerns promptly could deepen perceptions of cronyism and unfair competition within Ghana’s extractive sector, urging authorities to uphold transparency, equity, and due process in all concession-related decisions.

Calls For Transparency And Due Process

The GIADEC CEO has yet to publicly respond in detail to the latest criticisms, but government officials have consistently maintained that all decisions within the extractive sector are guided by law, technical evaluation, and national interest.

Industry watchers note that the mineral resource governance framework — particularly under the Minerals and Mining Act and its accompanying regulations — requires competitive processes, strict compliance checks, and ministerial oversight before any concession is awarded or transferred.

Nevertheless, the controversy has triggered calls from sections of the public, civil society, and policy analysts for greater transparency in how strategic mining assets are reassigned.