Extortionist tag: Afenyo-Markin sues Sammy Gyamfi

A Legal Showdown Looms
A political and financial dispute between Minority Leader in Parliament Alexander Afenyo-Markin and Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) Chief Executive Officer Sammy Gyamfi has taken a legal turn, with the Effutu Member of Parliament initiating defamation proceedings against the GoldBod boss.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin announced the lawsuits when Parliament reconvened on Monday, August 24, 2026, signalling that the increasingly heated public exchanges between the two men would now be settled in court. The Minority Leader says he considers statements made by Mr Gyamfi about him to be false and defamatory.

The “Extortionist” Tag
The dispute intensified after Mr Gyamfi described Mr Afenyo-Markin as an “extortionist” in response to the Minority Leader’s criticism of GoldBod and his demands for greater accountability over the reported financial losses associated with the Bank of Ghana’s Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP). The description has become a major point of contention, with Mr Afenyo-Markin choosing to pursue the matter through the courts rather than allowing the public exchanges to continue unchecked.
According to the Minority Leader, the statements were not only inaccurate but also damaging to his reputation.

The $1.7 Billion Question
At the centre of the disagreement is the reported US$1.7 billion loss recorded by the Bank of Ghana in 2025 under the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.
Mr Afenyo-Markin has repeatedly demanded explanations from the government and GoldBod regarding the reported loss. He has questioned the financial performance of the programme and sought clarity on GoldBod’s role in the transactions. His scrutiny has, however, been rejected by Mr Gyamfi, who has maintained that GoldBod itself did not incur the reported losses.
The disagreement over who should bear responsibility for the financial outcome has fuelled weeks of public exchanges between the two officials.

Lawsuits Against Gyamfi and Media Houses
Announcing the legal action in Parliament, Mr Afenyo-Markin disclosed that he had caused writs to be filed against Mr Gyamfi as well as media organisations that published or broadcast the statements at issue.
He cited Suit Number GT/1029/2026, titled Osahen Alexander Afenyo-Markin versus Samuel Adu Gyamfi and Multimedia Group Limited, filed at the Accra High Court.

He also referred to Suit Number GR/ACH/CC/C5/02/2026, titled Osahen Alexander Afenyo-Markin versus Eric Adjei and Peace FM, filed at the Achimota Circuit Court. The inclusion of media organisations in the legal action underscores the seriousness with which the Minority Leader is treating the alleged defamatory statements and their publication.

Afenyo-Markin Trusts the Courts
Mr Afenyo-Markin expressed confidence that the courts would determine the matter objectively on the basis of the evidence and the applicable law.
“I have every confidence that in the fullness of time the court will make the appropriate determination,” he said.
His comments suggest that he intends to allow the judicial process to establish whether the statements complained of amounted to defamation.

Gyamfi Ready to Defend His Claims
For his part, Mr Gyamfi has maintained that he will defend the claims he made against Mr Afenyo-Markin in court.
His position means the dispute is now moving beyond parliamentary debate and media exchanges into formal legal proceedings. The court cases could therefore provide a platform for both sides to present evidence surrounding the statements, the circumstances in which they were made and their alleged impact on Mr Afenyo-Markin’s reputation.

From Political Dispute to Courtroom Battle
What began as a disagreement over GoldBod’s operations and the financial performance of the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme has evolved into a broader political and legal confrontation.
With Mr Afenyo-Markin seeking judicial redress and Mr Gyamfi preparing to defend his statements, attention will now turn to the courts. The outcome could have implications not only for the two officials but also for the wider debate over accountability, public criticism and the limits of political discourse in Ghana.