Fresh details from the 2025 Annual Report of the Public Interest and Accountability Committee (PIAC) are raising fresh concerns about how Ghana’s petroleum revenues are used.
This concern is reinforced after it emerged that the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) spent a total of $15 million, as of December 2025, on the Ghana–Côte d’Ivoire maritime boundary dispute and its related activities.
Although the expenditure relates to a critical international legal battle, PIAC is questioning whether the national oil company should have borne the cost at all.
The Earlier $3.8 Million Question
According to the report cited by The High Street Journal, PIAC, in 2017, flagged the GNPC’s utilization of $3.8 million to fund secretariat and litigation-related activities in the maritime dispute between Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire
The case itself was handled at the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, which adjudicates disputes between sovereign states.
PIAC’s concern is that the dispute was between two sovereign countries, not between a state and a commercial entity. Therefore, it argues, there was no justification for GNPC, a national oil company, to directly finance the legal process.
“The International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) dispute was between two sovereign States and not between a sovereign State and a National Oil Company (NOC), for which reason it was wrong to have used GNPC’s resources to settle the cost of the litigation,” PIAC argued.
PIAC’s Recommendation: Refund the Money
PIAC maintains that the use of GNPC’s resources for the litigation was inappropriate and has called for a full refund of the $3.8 million to the corporation.
In its view, such costs should have been borne by the state, not a commercial entity operating within the petroleum sector.
The Committee’s stance reflects a broader concern about the proper use of oil revenues and the need to maintain clear boundaries between state responsibilities and corporate mandates.
“The amount of US$3.8 million spent by GNPC on the litigation should therefore be refunded to GNPC,” PIAC indicated.
GNPC’s Defence: A National Responsibility
GNPC, however, disagrees with PIAC’s position. The corporation argues that its involvement in funding the dispute falls within its approved annual work programme, which is sanctioned by Parliament.
The GNPC’s perspective suggests that the maritime boundary issue is directly linked to Ghana’s petroleum resources and territorial integrity, making it relevant to its operational mandate.
The report indicated, “PIAC notes GNPC’s argument that these payments are part of its annual work programme approved by Parliament. The Committee however disagrees with GNPC’s position.”
Ongoing Expenditure Raises Eyebrows
Despite the objection by PIAC, the latest report also reveals that spending on maritime boundary-related activities has not ended.
In 2025 alone, GNPC spent an additional $168,073.62 under the Maritime Boundary Special Project. Cumulatively, as of December 2025, the corporation has spent $14.97 million on maritime boundary-related efforts.
These ongoing expenditures are being channelled through the Ghana Boundary Commission, the state body tasked with managing such issues.
The Confusion
At the heart of the disagreement is a deeper governance question of who should pay for national legal battles tied to natural resources.
For PIAC, allowing GNPC to shoulder such costs and risks blurs accountability and could set a precedent for the use of petroleum funds beyond their intended scope.
However, for GNPC, the issue is more pragmatic; protecting Ghana’s oil-rich boundaries is inherently tied to its mandate and long-term viability.
The Bottomline
The dispute between PIAC and GNPC over this expenditure is not just about past spending; it reflects a broader tension in Ghana’s petroleum governance framework.
As oil revenues remain critical to national development, ensuring transparency, accountability, and clarity in how funds are used will remain central to public trust.
