The Minerals Commission has denied allegations by Narawa Company Limited that it unlawfully terminated the company’s mining leases and handed over its operations to an individual.
The Commission says the termination of Narawa’s Nsutam and Osiem mining leases followed the company’s failure to pay $909,127.79 in annual mineral right fees owed to the state.
In a statement issued on October 20, 2026, the Commission said Narawa defaulted on its payment obligations under Section 24 of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), and Clause 27 of its mining lease agreement with the Government of Ghana.
It said notices to remedy the breach were issued in accordance with the law, but the company failed to settle the outstanding amount within the stipulated period.
The Commission said it recommended the termination of the leases to the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources on July 29, 2025, and the Minister approved the recommendation on August 19, 2025.
A formal notice of termination was subsequently issued to Narawa on September 3, 2025.
According to the Commission, the termination meant the company no longer held any valid mineral rights or entitlement to the Nsutam and Osiem concession areas, with the mineral rights reverting to the state.
It added that any mining activities undertaken by Narawa on the concessions after the termination date would constitute illegal mining.
The Commission also denied authorising or permitting any invasion of the concession areas, explaining that the state had since granted new mineral rights over the areas to two different entities.
It said the entities were operating within the law and in compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements.
Arbitration proceedings pending
The Minerals Commission further disclosed that Narawa had instituted arbitration proceedings dated December 12, 2025, challenging the termination of its mineral rights.
The Commission said the matter remained pending but maintained that the termination of the leases continued to be in force until a final determination was made.
It described the company’s resort to media allegations while the substantive dispute remained before a competent adjudicatory process as improper and misleading.
The Commission reaffirmed its commitment to the transparent and lawful administration of Ghana’s mineral resources, insisting that it would not be swayed by attempts to misinform the public or circumvent due legal process.