Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), Sammy Gyamfi, has rejected claims that he insulted Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin during a recent exchange on GoldBod losses, insisting that his response was justified by remarks made against him.

Speaking on Newsfile on JoyNews on Saturday, August 22, Sammy Gyamfi said Alexander Afenyo-Markin’s claims regarding the alleged losses associated with GoldBod were serious and warranted a response.

Mr Gyamfi maintained that he did not insult the Minority Leader but was responding to what he described as personal and unfounded allegations about his role in GoldBod’s financial affairs.

“I never insulted him. And nobody can show me one word that I used that was insulting,” Mr Gyamfi said.

He invoked Newton’s Third Law of Motion to explain his response, saying: “For every action, there is equal and opposite reaction.”

According to Mr Gyamfi, Afenyo-Markin’s comments went beyond ordinary political criticism because they sought to associate him with serious wrongdoing and questioned his ability to meet conditions under Ghana’s International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme.

He said such claims were personal and required a strong response.

“Afenyo-Markin got the response he deserved,” Mr Gyamfi stated.

Mr Gyamfi said while he accepts criticism from political opponents, he believes some of Mr Afenyo-Markin’s comments were motivated by malice rather than a genuine disagreement over policy.

“When you listen to those criticisms, you see maybe lack of information. But they don't make it personal. But when you listen to him, you hear malice for Mr Gyamfi,” he said.

He argued that the IMF report being discussed did not concern him personally and questioned why Afenyo-Markin had sought to associate him with financial obligations arising from the report.

“This issue is not about Sammy Gyamfi,” he said, accusing the Minority Leader of attempting to smear his reputation.

Mr Gyamfi also dismissed suggestions that he had incurred losses in his current role, saying he should not be held responsible for financial obligations that do not relate to him.

In defending his response, Mr Gyamfi questioned Afenyo-Markin’s own record while serving in leadership positions at state-owned utility companies.

He claimed that Afenyo-Markin supervised cumulative losses of $3.3 billion at Ghana Water Limited between 2017 and 2024 and later oversaw losses of $8.2 billion at the Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG) in 2024.

Mr Gyamfi said he was raising the figures not as an insult but to demonstrate that Afenyo-Markin, like any other public official, is also open to scrutiny and criticism.

“Just like he can criticise me, he's also not beyond reproach,” he said.

He added: “This is not an insult. I am showing you that this is your record.”

Mr Gyamfi argued that if Afenyo-Markin could question his record, he should equally be prepared to have his own record examined publicly.

Mr Gyamfi further questioned claims that he had adopted an unusually personal tone in responding to his critics.

He said he had held numerous press conferences and participated in political debates over the years but had rarely resorted to language such as “extortion” when describing his opponents.

“Have you ever heard me use the word extortion against any of my critics? Have you ever heard me? Why will I use this word now?” he asked.

He said the circumstances surrounding his latest comments were linked to issues between himself and Afenyo-Markin that, according to him, were not fully known to the public.

“There are many underlying issues between Afenyo-Markin and I that you don't know and those watching don't know,” Mr Gyamfi said.

He maintained that Afenyo-Markin had not challenged the substance of his claims or threatened legal action over the remarks.

Mr Gyamfi described himself as a strong believer in political debate and said he was not afraid of criticism.

“I’m a consummate democrat. I eat and drink debates because I’m not worried,” he said.

He maintained that his comments should be understood within the context of the political exchange and not characterised as personal insults.