IMANI Vice President Bright Simons has shed light on the growing controversy surrounding fraud allegations made by Swiss investors against Ghanaian oil company Springfield and its CEO, Kevin Okyere. In a detailed analysis, Simons outlines the investors’ claims, including concerns over financial misrepresentation and contractual breaches. His breakdown adds new perspective to a case that could have significant implications for corporate governance and investor confidence in Ghana’s oil and gas sector.
The $100 Million Loan at the Heart of the Crisis
At the center of the storm is a $100 million loan facility Petraco extended to Springfield to support the proposed unitisation of its Afina oil discovery with the nearby Sankofa-Gye Nyame field operated by Italian giant ENI and Swiss trader Vitol. Springfield drew down $50 million of the facility in early 2023, with repayment tied to the success or failure of the controversial unitisation plan.
According to Simons, Springfield has been in default for nearly 10 months, failing to repay the debt as the merger effort faltered. While Springfield maintains that it provided sufficient collateral in the form of a 10% equity charge and personal guarantees from its founder Kevin Okyere, Petraco disputes the adequacy of these securities and has turned to Ghana’s Economic & Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and the Ghana Police Criminal Investigations Department to seek redress.
The Murky $29 Million Oil Cargo Deal
Complicating matters further, Petraco’s complaint also cites a $29.3 million gasoline cargo transaction conducted under Ghana’s highly controversial Gold-for-Oil programme. In September 2024, Springfield’s affiliate GMP Energy, owned by Kevin Okyere’s close associate Geena Malkani, facilitated the sale of an oil shipment (MT Hatay) to Ghana’s Bulk Oil Storage and Transportation Company (BOST), with Petraco’s involvement.
While BOST reportedly paid for the cargo, GMP allegedly withheld the funds, setting off months of denials, legal threats, and internal maneuvering between Springfield, BOST, and Petraco. Petraco eventually uncovered what it believes to be deliberate fraudulent schemes to deprive it of its rightful proceeds.
“The accusations of fraud, if they have any merit, thus implicate BOST, a state-owned enterprise, with serious implications for Ghana’s reputation,” Simons writes.
How Ghana’s National Champion Strategy May Have Backfired
The Springfield-Petraco saga has reignited debate about Ghana’s resource nationalism policies. Springfield was once positioned by sections of government as a ‘national champion’, a homegrown player meant to take a leading role in Ghana’s oil sector. Critics like IMANI Africa and the Africa Centre for Energy Policy (ACEP) long argued that Springfield lacked the financial muscle and operational track record to assume such a role.
“The evidence that has since emerged is that there is nothing nationalist about a program that does not meet national interest,” Simons states.
Documents reviewed by Simons indicate that Springfield, despite its bold ambitions, has faced deep financial struggles. Its parent company holds negative equity, accumulated losses exceeding $13 million, and limited operating cash flow. Despite these financial woes, Springfield reportedly continued paying large director fees and consultancy payments to insiders, raising fresh questions about internal governance and oversight.
The Bigger Policy Failure: Weak Institutions, Not Just One Company
While Springfield and Petraco’s commercial dispute may ultimately be settled through arbitration, Simons stresses that the broader issue lies in Ghana’s weak institutional discipline. He notes that Ghana failed to create a robust monitoring regime to properly evaluate Springfield’s ongoing eligibility for public support.
“National champion selection is a very sophisticated exercise that must always be driven by serious national interest, analytical discipline, and the willingness to continuously monitor, reward and sanction,” he argues. “Ghana lacked the disciplining institutions for driving a national champion agenda.”
The scandal also casts a harsh spotlight on the country’s Gold-for-Oil programme, which has long faced calls for reform due to opaque dealings and weak oversight. The involvement of BOST in this controversy risks further eroding public trust in the government’s energy sector management.
Ghana’s Reputation at Stake
Perhaps most concerning for Ghana is the reputational damage the dispute is inflicting. Petraco’s frustration over lack of response from Ghanaian authorities paints an image of regulatory paralysis and unwillingness to confront serious allegations involving politically connected businesses.
“It seems as if giant metal locks have been used to clamp the pens and faculties of all political and regulatory actors in the country,” Simons notes, criticizing the silence from energy ministry officials, regulators, and investigators who once rushed to back Springfield’s ambitions.
A Call for Redemption
Despite the unfolding drama, Simons suggests that Ghana still has a window to salvage its reputation, if authorities step up.
“A fair and amicable settlement between Springfield and Petraco would do credit to the Ghanaian jurisdiction in the eyes of investors both local and foreign,” he said
Last Updated on June 27, 2025 by Senel Media
