Mahama cautioned against repeating Rawlings-era mistake with Tarkwa Mine

Prominent Ghanaian lawyer and public policy analyst Kofi Bentil has waded into the growing controversy surrounding the future of the Tarkwa Gold Mine, urging President John Dramani Mahama not to repeat what he describes as a costly mistake made during the administration of former President Jerry John Rawlings, when mining rights over one of Ghana’s richest gold deposits were granted to South African mining giant Goldfields for what he claims was a consideration fee of just US$30,000.

According to Bentil, the amount represented an average of just US$1,000 annually over 30 years, during which Goldfields Ghana Limited generated approximately US$30 billion from its mining operations.

His claims have raised questions about the circumstances under which the mining rights were originally granted and whether Ghana has received adequate value from the exploitation of its mineral resources.

His intervention comes amid mounting pressure on the Mahama administration from chiefs and queen mothers of the Wassa Fiase and Apinto Traditional Areas in the Western Region, who are demanding that the government refuse to renew Goldfields’ mining leases when they expire in April 2027.

The traditional authorities want the government to take control of the lucrative Tarkwa Gold Mine and subsequently transfer its operations to a competent indigenous Ghanaian investor, arguing that decades of gold extraction by foreign companies have failed to deliver commensurate economic and social benefits to communities affected by mining activities.

The controversy has brought renewed attention to mining agreements negotiated during the Rawlings administration, particularly the terms under which state-owned mining assets were transferred to private operators as part of Ghana’s mining sector reforms.

In a strongly worded Facebook post, Bentil, who is associated with the public policy think tank IMANI Ghana, shared what he described as a copy of the original mining lease agreement between the Government of Ghana and Goldfields, drawing attention to Clause 20, which addresses the company’s financial obligations.

“Here is a copy of the signed Lease between Ghana and Goldfields. Check clause 20,” he wrote, claiming that the company acquired rights over exceptionally rich gold deposits nearly 30 years ago for a consideration fee that was insignificant compared with the wealth subsequently generated from the operations.

“How much do you think they paid for the lease? $30,000…. That’s not a mistake, they were given the mines for that petty sum of $30,000 as if it was a galamsey pit!!” Bentil stated.

He estimated that the company had generated approximately US$30 billion from the mine over the period, describing the asset as among the richest in the South African company’s mining portfolio.

However, Bentil did not establish whether the US$30 billion represented cumulative revenue, profit or another measure of financial performance.

Similarly, the alleged US$30,000 consideration fee must be distinguished from other financial obligations associated with the mining operations, including royalties, corporate taxes, capital investments and other statutory payments to the state.

Nevertheless, his intervention has reignited questions about the valuation of Ghana’s mineral resources, the negotiation of mining agreements and whether successive governments have secured adequate returns from the country’s natural wealth.

Beyond the amount allegedly paid for the mining rights, Bentil questioned why Ghana surrendered control of an established mining operation to a foreign company when significant infrastructure had already been developed with public resources.

He argued that the mine was not an entirely new venture requiring the investor to bear all the initial costs associated with establishing a mining operation.

“Note that the mine infrastructure had already been built before 1997 and was running as state Gold mine,” he stated.

According to him, the arrangement effectively handed a valuable national asset to a private operator for a fraction of its potential economic worth.

He maintained that the enormous wealth subsequently generated from the mining operations demonstrated the need for Ghana to reconsider the terms under which foreign companies are permitted to exploit the country’s mineral deposits.

Bentil was emphatic in his opposition to any repetition of the arrangement, urging the Mahama government to take advantage of the approaching expiry of the mining leases to pursue a different ownership structure.

“Under no circumstance must we repeat this mistake. CANCEL THE LEASE!!!” he declared.

He accompanied his post with the hashtags #IndigenizeOurMines and #GoldfieldsMustGo, signalling his support for greater Ghanaian ownership and control of the mining industry.

Bentil’s comments have reinforced demands by traditional authorities in the Wassa Fiase and Apinto Traditional Areas, where the mine is located, who insist that the expiry of Goldfields' mining leases in April 2027 presents an opportunity for the Mahama government to correct what they consider decades of economic injustice.

At a general meeting of the Wassa Fiase Traditional Council on Wednesday, 4 November 2026, divisional chiefs and queen mothers expressed frustration over what they described as the limited benefits their communities had received despite the enormous wealth extracted from their lands.

The traditional leaders complained about the poor state of roads, inadequate social infrastructure, insufficient corporate social responsibility projects and delays in the payment of royalties due to traditional authorities.

They argued that communities hosting the mining operations continued to bear the environmental and social consequences of gold extraction without receiving a fair share of the economic benefits.

The chiefs consequently appealed to President Mahama to reject any application by Goldfields for the renewal of its mining leases and instead consider an arrangement that would place the mine under greater Ghanaian ownership and control.

The Apinto Divisional Council, within whose traditional jurisdiction the Tarkwa mine is situated, has separately petitioned the government against renewing the company’s mining rights.

The council wants the concession transferred to a capable indigenous investor with the financial resources, technical expertise and managerial competence to operate the mine while ensuring that host communities and the country derive greater economic benefits.

The government currently holds a 10 per cent interest in the Tarkwa operation, while Goldfields controls the remaining 90 per cent.

The approaching expiry of the leases has therefore generated intense debate over whether the existing ownership structure should be maintained, renegotiated or replaced with an arrangement that gives Ghanaian investors a controlling interest.

The mining lease document circulated by Bentil has also attracted attention because of provisions governing the relationship between the government and the mining company.

The reproduced portion contains Clause 19, titled “Confidential Treatment,” which imposes restrictions on the disclosure of certain information supplied by the company to the government.

Under the provision, information supplied by the company is to be treated as confidential for five years from its submission or until the termination of the agreement, whichever occurs sooner, subject to specified exceptions.

The clause nevertheless permits the government to use such information in preparing general reports on Ghana’s mineral resources and in connection with disputes between the parties.

Clause 20, headed “Financial Obligations,” begins with a subsection dealing with the consideration fee payable in exchange for the grant of the mining lease.

However, the complete wording of that provision, including the amount payable, is not visible in the portion of the agreement reproduced in Bentil’s post.

Mining companies are ordinarily subject to additional obligations, including royalties, taxes and investment commitments, which must be considered when assessing the overall economic benefits of a mining agreement.

Nevertheless, critics argue that the fundamental question is whether Ghana has obtained a fair share of the wealth generated from its mineral resources, particularly where substantial infrastructure existed before private investors assumed control.

The growing agitation for indigenous ownership has also brought attention to the operations of Engineers and Planners (E&P), the Ghanaian mining company owned by businessman Ibrahim Mahama.

Supporters of greater local participation have pointed to E&P’s operations at the Damang Gold Mine, previously operated by Goldfields, as evidence that indigenous companies can possess the technical expertise and managerial capacity required to operate major mining assets.

Since assuming operations at Damang in April 2026, E&P has undertaken measures to expand its workforce, increase production capacity and strengthen local participation.

Available operational figures indicate that the workforce increased from 207 employees at the time of the handover to 426 by September 2026, including 120 workers whose employment arrangements were regularized from labour-hire contracts.

Approximately 62 per cent of the workforce is drawn from 10 surrounding communities, reflecting efforts to increase employment opportunities for residents of the mining area.

Monthly mining volumes also reportedly increased from 1.4 million tonnes in May to approximately 3 million tonnes in September 2026, while the company projected that its workforce would exceed 500 employees before the end of the year.

Advocates of indigenous ownership argue that such developments demonstrate the potential for Ghanaian mining companies to operate major concessions while retaining a greater proportion of the economic benefits within the country.

They maintain that Ghana has developed a substantial pool of experienced mining engineers, including graduates of the University of Mines and Technology in Tarkwa, as well as geologists, financial professionals and technical personnel capable of supporting large-scale mining operations.

Others, however, argue that any decision to transfer the Tarkwa concession would require careful consideration of financing, technical capacity, existing infrastructure, production continuity, employment obligations and the legal rights of the parties involved.

With the April 2027 expiry approaching, the Mahama administration faces an important decision over the future of one of Ghana’s major gold-producing operations.

The debate has moved beyond whether Goldfields should retain its mining rights to the broader question of how Ghana should structure mining agreements to secure greater national and community benefits.

For the chiefs of Wassa Fiase and Apinto, the central concern is that decades of gold extraction have not translated into the level of development they believe their communities deserve.

For Bentil, the issue goes further, touching on the historical decisions through which valuable national assets were transferred to foreign investors and the need to prevent similar arrangements in the future.

His reference to the Rawlings-era agreement has revived questions about the circumstances surrounding the original grant of the mining rights, the valuation of the assets and the financial benefits that accrued to the state.

The government must now weigh the competing considerations of investor confidence, contractual obligations, indigenous participation, employment security and the country’s long-term economic interests.

The decision could also have implications for Ghana’s wider mining industry, particularly as demands grow for increased local ownership of mineral resources and a greater share of mining revenues for host communities.

For Bentil and the traditional authorities opposing the renewal of Goldfields’ leases, the approaching expiry represents an opportunity for the Mahama government to reassess an arrangement they believe has disproportionately benefited a foreign mining company.

Whether the government ultimately renews the leases, renegotiates their terms or transfers the concession to a Ghanaian operator, the outcome is likely to become an important test of its commitment to maximising national benefits from the country’s mineral wealth.

At the heart of the controversy is a fundamental question: Will Ghana retain the ownership arrangements established nearly three decades ago, or will the Mahama administration use the expiry of the Tarkwa mining leases to pursue a new model that gives Ghanaians greater control over their gold resources?