The Damang Drama: Ibrahim Mahama and Bright Simons Case explained”
Few episodes in Ghana’s recent economic governance history have laid bare the tangled web of politics, resource nationalism, and private enterprise more clearly than the unfolding drama at the Damang gold mine. What began as a quiet contractual shift between Gold Fields and a local mining services firm has evolved into a national spectacle involving state muscle, legal threats, and broader questions about how Ghana treats both its investors and its institutions.
At the centre of this crisis are two names that require little introduction: Ibrahim Mahama, brother of the former President and owner of Engineers & Planners (E&P); and Bright Simons, a widely respected technocrat and civic voice with a reputation for asking inconvenient questions. What makes this standoff extraordinary is not just the legal battle it has triggered, it’s what it reveals about the fragile boundaries between political influence, corporate interest, and public accountability in Ghana’s resource economy.
Gold Fields, a multinational with a long and steady presence in Ghana’s mining sector, signed over the operational control of its Damang site to E&P in 2016. This move aligned with the government’s push for greater local participation in extractives, a move both principled and practical. E&P, for its part, made heavy capital commitments to scale up operations, borrowing extensively and expecting long-term commercial viability.
But the logic of mining contracts is dictated as much by geology as it is by politics. When Gold Fields, in 2022, chose to halt fresh ore extraction, citing the need to re-evaluate the mine’s long-term value and its soon-to-expire lease, the consequences cascaded fast.
Then came the real shock: in 2025, the government refused to renew the Damang lease and sent soldiers to forcibly secure the site.
It was a move more reminiscent of expropriation than structured policy recalibration. In one sweep, Ghana rattled investor confidence and left stakeholders scrambling for explanations.
Into this turbulence stepped Bright Simons. In a pointed, analytical article, his critique was sharp: Why was the state in such haste? Why had it bypassed technical and transitional safeguards? And crucially, was the involvement of E&P, a company with close ties to the government, influencing what should have been a sober, commercially rational decision, he asked?
But E&P responded with a libel suit, citing Bright Simons for defamation and having caused financial harm. Simons responded with a motion to prove that E&P’s losses were real and traceable to business risks, not media commentary.
Below, in bullet points, is the case summary as of today.
- Since 2001, Gold Fields has had a majority interest in the Damang gold mine.
- Between 2004 and 2016, Engineers & Planners (E&P), owned by the brother of Ghana’s President, was a contractor at the Damang mine.
- In 2016, Gold Fields outsourced the entire operation of mining the gold ore at Damang to E&P. E&P mines and hauls the ore to Gold Fields’ processing site and is paid for its services. E&P inherited a lot of the staff and equipment at the mine from Gold Fields as a result of this contract.
- In December 2019, Gold Fields renewed the contract with E&P for a further 5 years. Every ton of ore delivered by E&P was to be paid for under the contract. E&P borrowed heavily to buy new equipment in the hopes of making $300 million over 5 years from December 2019 to December 2024.
- However, in 2022, Gold Fields took a decision to pause receiving fresh ore from E&P from 2023 onwards and to only process stockpiles of ore it had in storage. The reason was because it was conducting studies to decide whether there was enough gold to justify holding on to the mine whilst working on its application to renew its mining lease due to expire in April 2025.
- In 2025, the government abruptly refused to renew the Damang mining lease. It demanded that Gold Fields vacate the mine and sent soldiers to secure the place.
- Bright Simons wrote an article in which he argued that the government’s actions were rash and poorly thought through. A mine cannot be shut down like a kiosk. The government needed to agree a sensible transition arrangement to deal with many complex issues, such as the ownership of the stockpiles, the commercial viability of the mine, and the fate of the many workers there. Why was the government then in such a rush to take it over?
- Bright Simons also raised concerns about the messiness of the government nationalising a mine operated by a company owned 100% by the brother of the President which was losing money by the day because mining had been suspended amid challenges with creditors. Would E&P’s influence force a premature restarting of the now nationalised mine even if not commercially sensible? Considering E&P’s past complaints about the rates Gold Fields were paying, would the government, which had taken over the mine at the time Bright was writing, be able to set a market-reflective rate at arms length?
- The government changed tack and granted Gold Fields a one-year lease to allow for a longer-term plan to be made. Ibrahim Mahama and E&P, however, took strong exception to the article by Bright Simons. They filed a libel suit on the grounds that claims of E&P being hit financially and having challenges with their creditors are defamatory. They also considered the article as loaded with innuendos suggesting that they had influenced the government’s decisions.
- Responding to the defamation suit, Bright Simons has filed a motion seeking to prove that Gold Fields’ decision to pause E&P’s mining services at Damang has cost the latter company tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue and contributed to challenges with lenders like Stanbic, EBID, and equipment financiers & suppliers.
Ibrahim Mahama’s legal team is from Robert Smith Law Group and led by Bobby Banson. Bright Simons’ legal team is from AudreyGrey Unlimited and led by Samuel Alesu-Dordzi.
