Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), Sammy Gyamfi, has defended the institution's decision to respond forcefully to what he described as deliberate misinformation and smear campaigns targeting the gold trading institution and individuals associated with it.

Speaking on Newsfile on JoyNews, Mr Gyamfi drew a distinction between legitimate criticism of GoldBod and what he characterised as deliberate attempts to spread false information, damage reputations and undermine public confidence in institutions.

He said GoldBod welcomes scrutiny and criticism but would not treat what he considers malicious misinformation as ordinary political disagreement.

“There is a difference between constructive criticism by opponents or critical voices and a deliberate, malicious disinformation campaign, a deliberate smear campaign,” he said on Saturday, August 22.

According to Mr Gyamfi, the distinction is important because constructive criticism is based on issues that can be debated and examined, whereas a smear campaign is designed primarily to damage the reputation of a person or institution.

The GoldBod CEO said some of the claims being circulated against the institution were not based on verifiable facts or substantive issues.

He described such claims as attempts to “denigrate personalities and institutions” and “demonise them in the eyes of right-thinking members of society.”

It was against this backdrop, he explained, that GoldBod had decided to respond publicly to allegations and claims it considered misleading.

“And that is why we have had to respond to this matter the way we have done,” he said.

While acknowledging the role of opponents and critical voices in holding institutions accountable, he argued that criticism should be grounded in facts and issues capable of public scrutiny.

Mr Gyamfi also welcomed efforts by Multimedia Group, particularly its research team, to independently examine claims being made in the public debate.

He said he was pleased that the media organisation had chosen to scrutinise the competing claims rather than simply allowing political actors to argue over issues that could be independently verified.

“I am so happy that Multimedia, particularly your research team, have decided not to be neutral in this contest between truth and lie,” he said.

Mr Gyamfi criticised what he described as a tendency by the media to give politicians extended platforms to debate issues that could be resolved by checking available facts.

“Most often than not the media decides to allow politicians to debate endlessly issues that are easily verifiable,” he said.

He suggested that independent verification could help prevent public discussions from becoming prolonged exchanges of competing assertions, particularly when the underlying facts can be established through documents, records or other credible evidence.