The Institute of Economic and Research Policy (IERPP) has issued a strong call for transparency following the Bank of Ghana’s (BoG) recent decision to ban ten Money Transfer Organisations (MTOs) over what the central bank described as “severe regulatory violations.” While some in the sector are applauding the BoG’s efforts to clean up the financial landscape, IERPP is raising concerns about the lack of details provided, warning that this opacity could erode public trust and undermine regulatory credibility.
Let’s get to the point: The BoG’s public notice offered little clarity. Stakeholders are left wondering—what exactly did these MTOs do to trigger such a sweeping action? Was it licensing issues, failed anti-money laundering protocols, or a breakdown in technology? Without specifics, it’s difficult for other market participants to understand the compliance benchmarks or avoid similar pitfalls.
Prof. Isaac Boadi, Executive Director of the IERPP and Dean at UPSA, didn’t mince words. He stated, “Banning violators is praiseworthy, but hiding details is opacity, not regulation. The public deserves the ‘why,’ not just the ‘who.’” In other words, regulation without context risks alienating the very market it aims to protect.
The IERPP has outlined several areas where the BoG’s communication fell short:
- No specifics regarding the nature of the infractions—did they involve licensing, anti-money laundering (AML), or technology failures?
- No guidance on remediation, licensing reinstatement, or corrective actions for affected entities.
- Absence of information about appeal processes, grace periods, or opportunities for the firms to respond prior to being blacklisted.
- Lack of transparency around the sanctions imposed and the criteria used to determine them.
Prof. Boadi cautions that regulation without clear pathways for rehabilitation simply leads to exclusion and resistance, rather than improved compliance.
This push for clarity isn’t happening in isolation. Ghana’s regulatory environment is shifting—other agencies, such as the National Communications Authority, have recently taken decisive actions against non-compliant entities, but not without offering clear justifications. Meanwhile, data from the Financial Stability Report and the World Bank highlight growing risks in the sector; Ghana reportedly loses over $1.2 billion annually to illicit financial flows, and last year alone saw $4.6 billion in remittance inflows. With these stakes, it’s not surprising that stakeholders are insisting on a higher standard of transparency from regulators.
IERPP’s recommendations are straightforward: The BoG should issue a follow-up statement outlining the categories of breaches per banned MTO, steps for reinstatement or correction, timelines for appeal or compliance, and a clear explanation of sanctions and their legal basis.
As Prof. Boadi put it, “Transparency builds trust in institutions. If we want to inspire confidence in Ghana’s financial ecosystem, we cannot regulate behind closed doors.”
To sum up: As Ghana modernizes its financial architecture, openness and accountability must be at the forefront of regulatory action. Anything less risks undermining both sector stability and public confidence.