IMF Drops Bombshell: Ghana’s Asset Declaration System Is Basically Useless!

On a worldwide scale, asset-declaration systems are seen as very effective techniques for bolstering public confidence, discouraging the acquisition of illegal riches, and encouraging honesty in public service. This idea is upheld by the Constitution of Ghana, which mandates that those who hold public office must disclose the assets they own at the beginning and conclusion of their term and at other points throughout their service. Despite the fact that the system is said to have a fairly solid legal base, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) states that it is not working. The Fund has come to the conclusion that the asset disclosure system in Ghana is “incomplete and ineffective” as a vehicle for combating corruption, according to the most recent Governance Diagnostic Assessment of Ghana that has been carried out by the Fund. The framework of Ghana is based on Article 286 of the Constitution of the year 1992 as well as the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act of 1998 (Act 550). In conjunction with one another, they determine who is required to make the declaration, what information is required to be disclosed, and the timing of the declaration. The list of officials who are expected to file is extensive, and it includes the President and Vice President, Ministers, Members of Parliament, judges, leaders of public institutions, constitutional office holders, and senior public personnel. According to the principles of this architecture, the openness that is required at both the start and conclusion of a public official’s term in office should make it simpler to identify unlawful wealth accumulation and, thus, assist Ghana avoid corruption. There is a full list of assets and liabilities that are required to be disclosed according to the legislation. These include land, buildings, farms, automobiles, company interests, bank balances, stocks, jewelry that is valued beyond a certain amount, and family property in which the official has a beneficial interest. In addition, it says that any property that a public official obtains and cannot be explained by legal revenue sources may be considered “unlawfully acquired.” Declarations have the potential to be used as evidence in both judicial and investigative proceedings, and infractions of these declarations may result in penalties, such as the prohibition of an individual from holding a public office.