Professor Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, former Minister for Environment, Science, Technology, and Innovation, has called for a national consensus to promote enduring and sustainable mining practices in Ghana.
He argued that the persistence of the galamsey crisis is not attributable to a lack of robust legislation, but rather to ineffective enforcement mechanisms, local complicity, and political interference.
During the 20th Annual Kronti ne Akwamu Democracy and Governance Public Lecture, titled “Galamsey: A Country in Search of Solutions in Plain Sight,” Professor Frimpong-Boateng remarked that Ghana is neglecting substantial economic prospects within its forests while concentrating excessively on gold extraction.
“As a doctor and a scientist, it saddens me to think that the environment must be compromised for the sake of eight or ten billion dollars. The trees are the most visible elements in the forest or agricultural lands, yet there are resources even more valuable than trees. Our forests harbor numerous resources that could yield greater financial returns than gold,” he stated.
Professor Frimpong-Boateng further emphasized the importance of initiating a national dialogue regarding appropriate and sustainable mining practices in the nation.
“However, if gold extraction is to occur, it must be conducted sustainably and with due regard for the environment. A national consensus is essential. This is a highly intricate issue, necessitating that individuals convene to propose suggestions and solutions—some of which may be difficult to accept, yet must be enacted,” he remarked.
Despite apprehending 1,190 illegal miners since 2023, only 35 prosecutions have been successful. Professor Frimpong-Boateng noted that this inadequate enforcement record highlights internal betrayal, a lack of political commitment, and institutional frameworks that prioritize shielding offenders over protecting affected communities.
The Kronti ne Akwamu Lecture serves as CDD-Ghana’s premier annual forum on democracy and governance, designed to bridge the divide between reflection, research, analysis, and advocacy for democracy.
