The Director of the Mining Department at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Michael Sandow Ali, has revealed that some guidelines used to regulate mining activities in Ghana’s forest reserves were not legally binding, but were developed administratively to address pressing national circumstances.

Speaking at the JoyNews National Dialogue on Repealing L.I. 2462 on Thursday, May 8, Mr. Ali explained that parts of the country’s mining framework—particularly those allowing mining in forest reserves—have long been misunderstood due to limited public education.

“This law has been misconstrued. I believe that because we didn't do enough education on it,” he said. “There are some aspects of it that, like A Rocha is saying… but this law was made after 20 years of watching mining in the forest—legalised mining in the forest reserves.”

• Read also: Mahama vows to amend Mining Act for permanent ban on forest mining

Mr Ali traced the issue back to the 1990s when approximately 30 companies were granted exploration permits in forest reserves by the Forestry Commission. A moratorium was later introduced, but many of these companies had already invested millions of dollars in their operations.

“In 1997, they had to reopen the context for them to go back and mine,” he recounted. “Out of the 30, 17 were given a chance to go back and do the exploration. Of these, five had discovered commercial quantities of gold that were economically viable to mine.

“And so, as a nation, what do we do? In 2001, when President Agyekum Kufuor came to power, some of them had sunk in as much as $18 million. Are we ready to pay judgment debt? So a five-member Cabinet Committee was set up to review the matter. Their recommendation was to allow the five companies to enter the forest and mine. These are legalised mines.”

To manage these operations responsibly, the EPA developed regulatory guidelines based on best practices from countries like Australia, South Africa, and Brazil. However, Mr. Ali admitted that not all of the provisions in these guidelines had legal backing.

“We did prepare some guidelines to that effect, to enable the five companies to enter. And they really did, and we regulated them very well. But under the guidelines, there were certain things… that were not by law.”

After 20 years of implementing these guidelines, the EPA reviewed them and concluded that a Legislative Instrument (L.I.) was necessary to give them legal force and avoid future regulatory challenges.

“The regulation was taken out after we reviewed the guidelines,” he explained. “So based on the review, it came out that, let’s put in an L.I., because somebody can come and say, ‘This is just a guideline—I may not follow.’”

Mr Ali’s comments add critical context to the ongoing national debate around L.I. 2462, reinforcing the need for clarity, transparency, and legal enforcement in Ghana’s environmental and mining policies.