 over what he describes as a troubling lack of transparency and governance in its handling of a $100 million financing deal for the Black Volta Gold Project.){kind=link}
Vice President of policy think tank IMANI Africa, Bright Simons, has strongly criticized the ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID) over what he describes as a troubling lack of transparency and governance in its handling of a $100 million financing deal for the Black Volta Gold Project.
The controversy stems from a widely publicized Acquisition Facility Agreement signed on July 7 between EBID and Engineers & Planners (E&P), a Ghanaian-owned company. The deal was hailed by government-aligned voices as a groundbreaking move to support Ghana’s first wholly indigenous large-scale gold mining venture.
However, the credibility of the agreement has come under serious scrutiny following a sharp rebuttal by Azumah Resources Ghana Limited — the company associated with the Black Volta Mine.
In a statement dated July 8, Azumah Resources categorically denied any ties to E&P, asserting that the latter “does not own any shares in Azumah” and has “not made any formal offer to invest in or fund” the company. The statement also stressed that Azumah retains “full ownership and control” of the Black Volta Gold Mine, which will be developed in accordance with Ghanaian laws and regulations.
Appearing on Channel One TV’s The Point of View with Bernard Avle on Wednesday night, Bright Simons condemned EBID’s silence on the matter and questioned the institution’s governance standards.
“I see a tendency to be non-transparent. These are public interest matters,” Simons stated. “For EBID to reach this point where they claim they’re funding the mine, in a traditional multinational development bank setup — like the World Bank or IFC — the amount of documentation that would have been generated would be unbelievable; it would all be on the website. I can’t find that information.”
Simons revealed that he reached out directly to EBID for clarity, but the bank declined to respond to his inquiries — an act he described as out of step with accepted practices among reputable international development institutions.
“This is not standard multinational development behaviour,” he said, underscoring the risk that opaque financial practices could erode public trust in regional institutions like EBID.
The unfolding dispute has sparked deeper questions about the due diligence processes followed by EBID before committing to the $100 million financing agreement. Stakeholders are questioning whether E&P misrepresented its relationship to Azumah Resources or whether the bank moved forward without verifying critical details related to ownership and project control.
Neither EBID nor Engineers & Planners has publicly responded to Azumah’s denial as of the time of this report.
Governance experts and civil society advocates are warning that such controversies could harm investor confidence and undermine efforts to localize ownership within Ghana’s lucrative mining sector. With regional banks like EBID tasked with catalyzing sustainable development, critics argue that lapses in transparency and stakeholder engagement could derail long-term goals.