Addressing the changing positions of surrogates of NPP on issue of Goldbod contracts

1. First, they alleged that the GoldBod has bought laptops at an inflated price.

The GoldBod adduced incontrovertible evidence from the website of the supplier to show that the price at which the said laptops were bought is slightly cheaper than the open market price of the specified laptop and market-competitive. They now appear to have completely abandoned that lie. “Gyandan yaamutu!”

2. Secondly, they alleged without any evidence that the GoldBod has awarded an GHS11 million office renovation contract to a company owned by Mr. Stan Dogbe through SOLE SOURCING.

The GoldBod adduced incontrovertible documentary evidence to show that the said contract was NOT awarded through SOLE SOURCING but rather, RESTRICTED TENDERING, approved by the PPA.

The use of restricted tendering was totally justified, given the fact that newly recruited workers of the GoldBod had no offices to operate from at the old Diamond House that housed the defunct PMMC. A competitive tendering process was clearly not practicable. The restricted tendering method was adopted for the said procurement activity to ensure that the process for undertaking the urgent renovation works was expedited through restricted competition. The rules of restricted tendering were not breached by the PPA that granted the approval.

3. After their sole sourcing claim was exposed to be a lie, the fake news merchants suddenly changed their argument, claiming this time, that RESTRICTED TENDERING IS THE SAME AS SOLE SOURCING. How ridiculous!.

A simple reading of sections 38 and 40 of the Public Procurement Act will show the difference between the two different and distinct procurement methods. Even the very names of the two methods of procurement should reveal to any serious mind that there is a gulf of difference between the two.

A key difference between the two methods of procurement is that, whereas, sole sourcing involves no tender and competition whatsoever, restricted tendering involves the invitation and submission of tenders and competition between multiple (3-6) contractors or suppliers.

4. After being ridiculed by discerning minds relative to their ridiculous equation of sole sourcing to restricted tendering, the desperate purveyors of fake news have shifted the goal post again. This time they claim that the company that won the bid to undertake the renovation and refurbishment works, Correca Ghana Limited did not have and did not submit a valid Works and Housing Certificate as part of their tender documents. This is because according to them, the letter submitting the company’s tender is dated 1st July, 2025, while its Works and Housing Certificate is dated 2nd July, 2025. Another ridiculous argument.

It’s trite, that the date of a letter is not the same as the date of submission of that letter. The letter submitting the company’s tender was dated 1st July, 2025. However, it was not submitted or received by the GoldBod on that date. Rather it was submitted to the GoldBod on 2nd July, 2025 by which time the renewed Works and Housing Certificate of the company had been issued.

It’s an incontrovertible fact, that Correca Ghana Limited’s tender was submitted to the GoldBod on 2nd July 2025 along with a valid Works and Housing certificate. The Evaluation Report of the Entity Tender Committee bears this fact out. This “gyandam” is also dead on arrival.

5. As for their latest claim of conflict of interest, the least said about it, the better. Correca Ghana Limited is not owned by Mr. Stan Dogbe as a person.

The company which has been in existence since August 2017, is co-owned by two different companies; Eclaire Ghana Limited and Woezor Holdings Ghana limited.

Checks with Correca Ghana Limited, will show that Mr. Stan Dogbe is no longer involved in the day to day running of either Correca Ghana Limited or Woezor Holdings Ghana Limited. Also, checks with the procurement unit of the GoldBod will show that Mr. Stan Dogbe was not in any shape or form involved in the procurement or tender evaluation process leading the award of the said contract. His position as Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations has no bearing with procurement processes of SoEs. As such, he could not and did not in any shape or form influence the procurement process.

Are these fake news merchants suggesting that, because Correca Ghana Limited which was formed in August 2017 is PARTLY owned by Woezor Holdings Ghana Limited, which Woezor Holdings Ghana Limited is PARTLY owned by Mr. Stan Dogbe, then Correca Ghana Limited should be banned from participating in any tender for a state or government contract, simply because Stan is Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations today? How ridiculous!.

When they scream conflict of interest, just ask them for the evidence of their alleged conflict of interest, whether real or potential.

These purveyors of fake news can continue to shift and change their contrived and warped arguments at every turn when they are exposed. But the fact still remains that no LAW or known rule of conflict of interest was breached in the award of the said contract. Their desperation to manufacture a scandal where there is none has completely collapsed.

The Ghana Gold Board holds dear the principles of transparency and accountability and will continue to uphold these tenets by publishing all contracts it enters into. We have nothing to hide.

By: Prince Kwame Minka
Media Relations Officer, GoldBod