A detailed rebuttal has emerged challenging recent claims by governance analyst Bright Simons concerning the operations of Ibrahim Mahama’s mining company, Engineers & Planners (DGML), at the Damang concession.
In a 15-paragraph post on X dated May 24, 2026, Simons was accused of making “unresearched and prejudiced” comments that demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of mining laws and practices in Ghana.
The defence, issued by unnamed backers of Mr. Mahama, argues that Simons’ critique ignores key constitutional provisions. They cite Article 268 of the 1992 Constitution, noting that a “mineral right” is not limited to a mining lease but includes any undertaking, contract, or transaction—regardless of description. The Damang concession arrangement, they say, aligns with the framers’ intent.
Contrary to suggestions that government revenues have been compromised, the rebuttal claims that all gold sales proceeds from DGML have been retained in Ghana. This allows for proper reconciliation of accounts after parliamentary ratification and ensures the government’s share is accurately determined.
The statement contrasts DGML’s approach with that of foreign firms, asserting that previous operators under unratified leases exported all their gold without retaining revenue locally. It further notes that no mineral rights holder typically waits for lease ratification before commencing operations or selling output.
Examples cited include Abosso Gold Fields, which reportedly received lease ratification more than 20 years after its lease was issued, and Newmont Ghana, among others, which operated for years before ratification—exporting gold throughout without attracting similar criticism.
“Criticism has intensified only because a wholly Ghanaian-owned company is operating and retaining revenue in Ghana,” the defence argues. The expectation that a lease should be issued and ratified within 30 days of awarding mineral rights is described as unrealistic.
The statement concludes by alleging a bias in favour of foreign firms and urges Mr. Simons to consult mining experts, describing his arguments as unreasonable and lacking legal foundation.
Neither Bright Simons nor DGML had issued an immediate response at the time of publication.
