Management of CMS-PRO and A&A Southern Industries Ltd., two related Ghanaian mining companies, have dismissed suggestions linking Mr Alfred Mahama, brother of President John Dramani Mahama, to the revocation of Nawara Company Limited’s mining concession, insisting that the decision was a regulatory matter.
The two companies, which subsequently acquired the concession, said Mr Mahama had no involvement in the revocation process and was not a shareholder in either of the companies.
According to management, the circumstances surrounding the revocation and the subsequent acquisition of the concession should be examined through official records and documentation held by the Minerals Commission, rather than speculation and political considerations.
In a statement issued and signed by their management, the companies maintained that their acquisition of the concession followed the applicable regulatory processes and should not be linked to the personal interests or alleged involvement of any individual.
The clarification comes amid public controversy surrounding the revocation of Nawara Company Limited’s mining concession and questions about the circumstances under which the two companies subsequently acquired the mining rights.
Management said the controversy required a clear distinction between the regulatory decisions concerning Nawara and allegations involving individuals who had no role in the process.
It particularly rejected suggestions linking Mr Mahama to the revocation, stressing that he had neither participated in the process nor held shares in CMS-PRO or A&A Southern Industries Ltd.
The companies maintained that the Minerals Commission, as the institution with the relevant records was best placed to provide authoritative information on the concession, including the circumstances surrounding its revocation and subsequent acquisition.
They argued that the matter should be treated as a regulatory issue requiring examination of the relevant documents and applicable mining requirements.
Companies defend acquisition process
On the subsequent acquisition of the concession, CMS-PRO and A&A Southern Industries Ltd. insisted that they had followed the applicable regulatory procedures.
They said their acquisition should not be interpreted as evidence of personal or political interests, adding that the process ought to be assessed on the basis of the relevant regulatory records.
The companies also maintained that neither Mr Mahama’s family relationship with the President nor public speculation about his alleged involvement should be used to determine the legitimacy of the transaction.
They called for discussions about the concession to be grounded in verifiable information, particularly given the availability of the Minerals Commission as the relevant source of official documentation.
Kpebu urged to establish facts
Management also took issue with public commentary by legal practitioner Martin Kpebu concerning the concession, urging him to exercise professionalism, restraint and objectivity in his engagements on the matter.
The companies expressed concern about what they described as repeated personal attacks against Mr Mahama, insisting that public discussions should focus on the facts surrounding the mining concession rather than personalities.
They urged Mr Kpebu to establish the facts and obtain credible information before making public statements, particularly on television and social media.
According to management, the availability of official records at the Minerals Commission makes it important for commentators to rely on documentary evidence when discussing the circumstances surrounding the revocation.
The companies further argued that political sentiments and attempts to influence public opinion should not overshadow the regulatory issues at the centre of the controversy.
They reiterated that the revocation of Nawara Company Limited’s concession and the subsequent acquisition by the two companies should be accessed through the relevant documentation and regulatory processes.
Management maintained that the Minerals Commission remained the appropriate institution to clarify the circumstances surrounding the concession and urged all parties participating in the public debate to rely on credible information.
The two companies said their position was to ensure that the discussion surrounding the Nawara concession was guided by facts, documentary evidence and the role of the relevant regulatory institutions.
For more news, join The Chronicle Newspaper channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBSs55E50UqNPvSOm2z
