Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin has criticised the newly passed Value for Money Office Act, 2026, describing it as ineffective and vulnerable to political manipulation rather than a genuine anti-corruption reform.
According to him, the law, which was championed by the Finance Minister as a major accountability measure in public procurement, lacks the independence required for any credible anti-corruption institution to function effectively.
In a Facebook post on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, Afenyo-Markin argued that the structure of the governing board is heavily dominated by partisan political appointees and reports directly to the Finance Minister, raising concerns about political interference.
“The Value for Money Office Act, 2026, is much ado about nothing,” he stated, insisting that “a regulatory body that lacks independence cannot fight corruption in public procurement.”
“A close look at the structure of the board reveals a body dominated by partisan political appointees. There is no real independence. The board reports directly to the Minister. A regulatory body that lacks independence cannot fight corruption in public procurement.”
He further warned that the arrangement could instead create an institution that may be used to legitimise questionable procurement decisions under the guise of regulatory approval.
“Instead, this arrangement risks creating an institution that could ultimately be used to justify and legitimise corruption in public procurement under the cover of regulatory approval,” he wrote.
The Minority Leader disclosed that he had raised similar concerns during the consideration stage of the bill in Parliament but said the government dismissed the objections.
“At the Consideration Stage of the bill, I cautioned the House that the law risked introducing a new layer of politically supervised corruption into the procurement process,” he said.
According to him, recent developments have vindicated the Minority’s position that the law merely creates another layer of bureaucracy serving political interests rather than promoting transparency and accountability.
Afenyo-Markin also compared Ghana’s new framework with similar institutions in other jurisdictions, arguing that credible Value for Money offices elsewhere are protected by strong legal safeguards that ensure independence in appointments, operations and oversight.
“In other jurisdictions where Value for Money institutions exist, the laws establishing them provide clear safeguards for independence in appointments, operational mandate and oversight authority,” he noted.
He maintained that Ghana already has sufficient legal frameworks to address procurement irregularities, including the Public Financial Management Act, the Public Procurement Act and internal audit systems across state institutions.
According to him, the country’s challenge is not the absence of laws but weak enforcement and inadequate support for existing accountability institutions.
“If this government truly wants to fight corruption, it would strengthen existing accountability institutions instead of creating politically controlled structures,” he said.
The Minority Leader urged Ghanaians to closely monitor the implementation of the new law, warning that it could eventually become “the shield behind which the next generation of procurement scandals is defended and justified.”
