Story by George Yawson Vineh
The Ghana Gold Board, commonly known as GoldBod, has strongly refuted claims that it paid GH¢11 million for the renovation of its office through an improper procurement process.
The allegations circulating on social media suggested that the contract for the renovation works was sole-sourced and awarded to a company linked to Deputy Chief of Staff in charge of Operations, Stan Dogbe. However, GoldBod says the claims are false and misleading.
In a statement issued by the Board’s Media Relations Officer, Prince Kwame Minkah, GoldBod explained that the contract was not awarded through sole sourcing, as widely alleged. Instead, the procurement was conducted through a restricted tendering process approved by the Public Procurement Authority (PPA).
According to the Board, the renovation became necessary following the establishment of GoldBod in April 2025, which led to the recruitment of more than 300 new staff and the creation of additional departments. This expansion required the organisation to move from the former offices of the defunct Precious Minerals Marketing Company to a larger facility in Accra that needed refurbishment.
GoldBod further explained that approval was obtained from the PPA in June 2025 to use restricted tendering because of the urgency of preparing office space for newly recruited staff. Under the process, three companies were shortlisted to submit bids, with Correca Ghana Limited eventually emerging as the successful contractor.
The Board also rejected suggestions that the contract created a conflict of interest involving Stan Dogbe, stressing that he had no involvement in the procurement or evaluation process leading to the award of the contract. Officials noted that his position as Deputy Chief of Staff does not grant him authority over procurement decisions in state institutions.
GoldBod emphasised that the renovation works were carried out professionally and in accordance with procurement regulations. As part of its transparency measures, the institution says it has published the contract documents on its official website for public scrutiny.
The Board therefore urged the public to disregard what it described as “false and mischievous claims” intended to tarnish its reputation, reiterating its commitment to transparency and accountability in all procurement processes and reaffirmed its focused on carrying out its mandate effectively while upholding the highest standards of integrity in the management of public resources.
