- CEDA-NRGI Study Flags Governance Risks in MIIF Operation
A study conducted by the Centre for Extractives and Development Africa (CEDA) with support from the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI) has raised significant concerns over the structure, governance and operational effectiveness of the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF).
The findings were presented by CEDA’s Executive Director, Samuel Bekoe, at a capacity training workshop for journalists focused on improving transparency and accountability in the management of Ghana’s sovereign wealth fund.
Mandate dilution and fiscal gaps
According to the study, MIIF’s hybrid mandate combining commercial investment objectives with development financing has resulted in a lack of clear separation of roles, complicating performance measurement and increasing the risk of political interference.
The report also highlighted the absence of a defined fiscal framework, noting that the Fund lacks explicit savings or stabilisation rules, withdrawal constraints, and a binding fiscal anchor comparable to global benchmarks.
Governance and transparency concerns
CEDA further identified governance vulnerabilities, including significant executive influence over board appointments and ministerial approval of allocation agreements, which weaken institutional independence and fiduciary safeguards.
Regarding transparency, the study noted that MIIF’s disclosure regime remains limited, relying largely on annual reporting and providing no provisions for contract disclosure, beneficial ownership transparency, or open data access.
“This reflects a compliance-oriented approach rather than a robust accountability framework,” Mr Bekoe indicated.
Impact of 2025 amendments
The study underscored the implications of recent legislative amendments to the Fund, particularly the reduction of MIIF’s statutory share of mineral royalties from 80% to just 2%.
According to CEDA, the revised allocation, which was largely designated for operational costs, has significantly constrained the Fund’s capital base and effectively curtailed its sovereign wealth accumulation role.
Additional amendments were noted to have increased centralised executive control, narrowed the Fund’s investment scope, and deepened its reliance on the Ministry of Finance for funding.
Oversight deficit and global comparison
The report also pointed to the absence of an independent, multi-stakeholder oversight body comparable to the Public Interest and Accountability Committee under the petroleum revenue framework.
It added that parliamentary oversight remains limited by the lack of technical advisory support for sovereign wealth fund-specific analysis.
In comparing MIIF with sovereign wealth funds in countries such as Norway, Chile and Botswana, the study found that Ghana’s fund lags behind in fiscal discipline, institutional independence, and transparency standards.
Portfolio and growth trajectory
Established under the Minerals Income Investment Fund Act, MIIF is mandated to manage Ghana’s equity interests in mining firms and optimise returns from mineral royalties.
Since its establishment in 2018, the Fund’s assets under management have grown from US$180 million to approximately US$1 billion as of 2024.
Its current portfolio includes investments such as US$40 million in Asante Gold Corporation (Bibiani and Chirano), US$60 million in Atlantic Lithium, US$60 million in Electrochem Ghana Limited, US$2 million in Castle Minerals, US$4 million in Injaro Ghana Venture Capital, and US$30 million in an artisanal small-scale mining incubation programme.
Despite this growth, the study concludes that structural and governance reforms are required to enhance transparency, strengthen oversight, and reposition MIIF to effectively deliver on its long-term mandate.
