Policy think tank IMANI Africa is urging President John Dramani Mahama to formally restate a 2014 position from his first administration that gave public institutions the freedom to place insurance based on merit, value for money, and competitive capacity.
The call comes in the third instalment of IMANI’s Insurance Question series, authored by IMANI associate Kay Codjoe, which argues that a simple, direct clarification from the Presidency would resolve the growing controversy over alleged political interference in Ghana’s insurance sector.
“That position must be restated, not as history, but as present policy,” the analysis states.
“Because today, ambiguity is doing the work that law has not done.”
What the 2014 Documents Show
The documents now in the public domain give the current controversy a striking historical mirror.
On December 9, 2013, the Office of the President, then also under President Mahama, issued a directive signed by the Executive Secretary to the President, Dr Raymond A. Atuguba, instructing all Ministries, Departments and Agencies to purchase or renew insurance cover “solely from insurance companies wholly or partially owned by the state.”
Any MDA wishing to do otherwise was required to obtain permission from the Presidency first.
SIC Insurance moved quickly.
In a letter dated January 8, 2014 and referencing the directive, SIC wrote to institutions confirming its state-owned status and requesting their insurance details for an audit, while also requesting renewal schedules to ensure continuity of cover.
But the Ghana Insurers Association pushed back.
In a formal petition dated January 24, 2014, signed by its then-President Kwame-Gazo Agbenyadzie and addressed to President Mahama at Flagstaff House, the GIA argued that the directive would entrench unfair competition, stifle innovation, damage private investment in the sector, and potentially usurp the regulatory functions of the National Insurance Commission.
The petition warned that the directive would give SIC “the advantage of charging MDAs unfair premiums because no other insurer can offer competitive premium rates,” and that the lack of competition would erode the drive for efficiency in claims settlement and product development.
President Mahama responded.
On February 21, 2014, his Chief of Staff, Prosper D.K. Bani, wrote to all ministers suspending the December 2013 directive “with immediate effect,” citing the need to consider the private insurance industry’s petition. The suspension affirmed that MDAs could buy or renew insurance from state or private insurers, provided they could “demonstrate value for money.”
That precedent issued, petitioned, and reversed within two months is now at the centre of IMANI’s argument.
IMANI’s latest analysis draws a direct line between 2013 and the present.
A December 11, 2025, communication from the State Interests and Governance Authority (SIGA), reference SIGA/SOE.SIC/1225, instructed state entities to prioritise SIC Insurance PLC and SIC Life for their insurance needs and followed up, requesting compliance reports.
IMANI founder Franklin Cudjoe formally petitioned President Mahama over the matter on March 30, 2026, during a civil society encounter at the Presidency.
The Office of the President formally acknowledged receipt of the petition on April 1, 2026, in a letter signed by the Secretary to the President, Callistus Mahama, PhD, assuring IMANI that the contents had been noted and would be brought to the President’s attention for necessary action.
What IMANI Is Now Asking For
The third IMANI analysis identifies four institutions that it says must act to resolve the crisis.
It calls on the Presidency to issue a clear affirmation that no insurer has automatic entitlement to state business, that policy encouragement does not override procurement law, and that all placements must meet competitive and technical standards.
It calls on SIGA to observe the limits of its mandate coordination and monitoring, and not cross into market allocation. “Encouragement cannot evolve into compulsion through interpretation,” the analysis states.
It calls on the Public Procurement Authority to require disclosure of procurement methods, verification of value-for-money assessments, and documented approvals where non-competitive methods are applied.
And it calls on the National Insurance Commission to break its silence on concerns about placement practices and market conduct.
“Silence does not create neutrality,” the analysis warns. “It creates uncertainty.”
IMANI also directed a firm reminder at the boards of state-owned enterprises, warning that they are fiduciaries, not extensions of policy signals and that every placement decision must be “defensible in law, in process, and in value.”
“If that system begins to perceive that structured commitments can be altered without due process, the consequences will not be immediate, but they will be real,” the analysis warns.
IMANI stops short of opposing state participation in the insurance market, but insists that any policy goal of strengthening state-linked insurers must be pursued “deliberately, transparently, and within the law.”
“This is not a call to defend private insurers. It is not a call to oppose state participation. It is a call to protect the integrity of how decisions are made,” the analysis concludes.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source:
www.myjoyonline.com