Three dead and a mine linked to Mahama’s brother: Is this an abuse of presidential power?

Three Ghanaians are dead. A mining concession is disputed. A court order is being questioned. And the name of Alfred Mahama, identified as President John Dramani Mahama’s brother, has been dragged into the centre of a national controversy.

This is no longer just a mining dispute. It is a test of whether Ghana is governed by law, or by power, connections and force.

What Narawa alleges

Narawa Company Limited says armed persons took over its mining concession at Nsuapemso in the Eastern Region on August 12, 2026. The company alleges that armed civilians and military personnel remained on the site, while unauthorised mining continued.

Narawa claims the takeover led to three deaths and injuries to 10 people, including a police officer, between August 12 and October 7. It also alleges that about 13 groups, some involving Chinese nationals, were mining at the concession without authorisation.

The company further alleges that its managing director spoke directly with Alfred Mahama, who it says confirmed he had sent persons to the site. Narawa wants an investigation into who was sent, for what purpose, under whose authority, and whether those people were involved in the alleged violence, theft or destruction.

What Alfred Mahama’s side says

Alfred Mahama has not personally issued a detailed public statement responding directly to Narawa’s specific allegation that he told the company’s managing director he had sent people to the disputed site.

Instead, the main public denial has come from CMS-PRO Industries and Construction Limited and A&A Southern Industries Limited, the two companies that later acquired the concession. They say Alfred Mahama had no involvement in the revocation of Narawa’s mining licence, was not a shareholder in either company, and did not influence the takeover.

They say the revocation was a regulatory and financial compliance matter, not a decision influenced by any government official or private individual. They have also rejected claims linking Alfred Mahama to an alleged violent takeover near Osino, urging the public to rely on the Minerals Commission’s explanation and official records rather than speculation.

They further alleged that Martin Kpebu and Kofi Bentil had sought payment for media advocacy on Narawa’s behalf, and suggested that a disagreement over payment may have contributed to the attacks on the companies and Alfred Mahama. They threatened legal action over statements they consider defamatory.

What Martin Kpebu is saying

Martin Kpebu’s central claim is that state officials are acting unlawfully in the Narawa Mines dispute, despite a High Court order barring the government from forcibly taking over the company’s concession while arbitration is pending.

He says some state officers have been brutalising and intimidating Narawa’s owners, and he describes their conduct as illegal. He has not yet named the officials, saying there is a scheduled meeting to address the matter—but he has warned that he will name them if it is not resolved.

Kpebu argues that a High Court order dated February 19, 2026, prevents the state from forcibly removing Narawa while its arbitration case is ongoing. His position is that the presence of armed personnel at the site, the alleged intimidation of Narawa’s owners and any continued occupation of the concession violate that order.

He questions the Minerals Commission’s decision to terminate Narawa’s mining leases. He argues that an alleged debt of about US$8 million cannot justify cancelling an investment he values at more than US$100 million.

He says the proper route for recovering a debt is through the courts, not by terminating a mining lease and allowing another company to take over the concession. He has also called for the removal of Minerals Commission Chief Executive Isaac Andrews Tandoh, arguing that the CEO cannot remain in office while allegedly acting against the law and undermining the government’s stated policy of increasing Ghanaian participation in mining.

What Kofi Bentil is saying

Kofi Bentil, Senior Vice-President of IMANI Africa, has accused the government of using state institutions to seize a Ghanaian-owned mining concession and hand it to Chinese operators. He says the Narawa case is part of a wider pattern threatening local investors.

His strongest claim is that the Minerals Commission, the ministry and the military “take the laws into their own hands, kill people, and take over their mines.” He described Ghana as “looking like a failed state” over the affair.

Bentil alleges that armed men entered Narawa’s mining concession and that a person was shot dead. He says this is not merely a civil dispute over a mining lease, but a serious criminal and regulatory matter that demands investigation.

He also alleges that the concession was later given to Chinese miners, who he says have begun clearing tree plantations and other vegetation.

Bentil says the Minerals Commission is undermining Ghanaian-owned mining companies through questionable revocations of mining rights. He cites Northern Ashanti Mines, Adamus Resources and Narawa Mines as examples.

He argues that the Commission’s handling of Narawa contradicts Ghana’s indigenisation policy, which is meant to increase local ownership and participation in mining. He wants President Mahama to intervene and ensure that the law is respected. He says the Minerals Commission CEO must go because of the actions taken against Narawa.

The government’s defence

The Minerals Commission rejects Kpebu’s and Bentil’s accounts. It says Narawa lost its leases after failing to pay US$909,127.79 in annual mineral right fees for its Nsutam and Osiem concessions.

The Commission says the rights reverted to the state after termination, and that any mining by Narawa after that point would be illegal.

CMS-PRO and A&A Southern Industries deny sending armed men to the site and say their applications followed normal procedure. They also deny that Alfred Mahama influenced the revocation or owns shares in either company.

Government spokesman Felix Kwakye Ofosu has cautioned against portraying regulatory enforcement as political sabotage, saying no lawlessness would be tolerated under President Mahama.

Why this matters

If the allegations are true, this is not merely bad governance. It is an abuse of state power: the use of force to take land from Ghanaians, followed by deaths, injuries and the alleged handover of the concession to foreign operators.

If the allegations are false, the government must prove it quickly, transparently and convincingly. Silence, selective investigations or vague statements will only deepen suspicion.

Ghana cannot afford to treat three deaths at a mining concession as another forgotten headline. The country’s credibility is at stake.

The investment damage

Investors do not only look for gold. They look for rules.

If a Ghanaian company can lose a concession after a dispute, despite a court order, and armed personnel can appear at the site, investors will ask: can my investment be protected?

This controversy could scare off serious local and foreign investors, especially in mining, agriculture and land-based businesses. It could also push capital towards countries with clearer property rights and stronger judicial independence.

What Ghana must do

President Mahama must order an independent, public investigation into the Narawa affair. It must establish who ordered the presence of security personnel, who authorised any takeover, who was involved in the violence, and whether Alfred Mahama played any role.

The findings must be published. Anyone found responsible for killings, intimidation, unlawful occupation or abuse of office must face the law, regardless of political connection.

Ghana must also protect the rights of local investors. If the country wants Ghanaians to own mines, it cannot allow local companies to be pushed out through force or unclear administrative decisions.

The bottom line

Three Ghanaians are dead. That alone demands answers.

If Alfred Mahama is innocent, prove it. If state institutions acted unlawfully, punish those responsible. If the land was taken legally, show the documents and explain the process.

Ghana cannot build investor confidence while its citizens fear that land, mining concessions and justice can be taken by force. This is not just about Narawa. It is about whether Ghana belongs to its people, or to those with power, connections and guns.

About The Author