The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is raising serious constitutional concerns over the government’s agreement to extend Tullow Oil’s petroleum licences without prior parliamentary approval.
At an expert roundtable hosted by the IEA, legal practitioner Victor Anku-Tsede argued that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the government and Tullow—intended to extend the West Cape Three Points and Deepwater Tano oil blocks from 2036 to 2040—constitutes a material change that must be validated by Parliament.
Anku-Tsede drew attention to a 2017 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Banful and Another v. Attorney General, in which the court affirmed that even informal international arrangements, such as a “note verbal,” required ratification. He contended that by that same legal reasoning, the MoU with Tullow qualifies as an international agreement needing parliamentary scrutiny.
He warned that sidestepping Parliament on resource agreements erodes constitutional oversight and undermines public accountability. While the original licence was duly approved with a 2036 expiration date, extending it through an MoU without parliamentary involvement could, in his view, breach legal requirements.
The IEA has therefore called on government officials to submit the extension agreement to Parliament without delay to ensure compliance with Ghana’s constitutional framework and to uphold transparency in the management of the country’s natural resources.
