Two administrations, same pattern of betrayal: LI 2462 and the legacy of Ghana’s forests

In November 2022, Ghana’s government under then-President Nana Akufo-Addo stood alongside global leaders at COP27 to launch the Forests and Climate Leaders’ Partnership (FCLP), a bold international initiative to protect vital ecosystems. In the very same month, however, that same government quietly enacted Legislative Instrument 2462—an obscure but dangerous law that opened Ghana’s forest reserves, both protected and production, to mining.

This was not just a contradiction; it was a betrayal. A failure of leadership and a breach of public trust. The government that presented itself as a climate champion abroad simultaneously sanctioned the exploitation of Ghana’s forests at home. Through LI 2462, it unleashed a wave of extractive interest that has placed more pressure on the nation’s remaining forests than ever before.

The public backlash was swift. Civil society, labour unions, faith leaders, professional bodies, and local communities rose together in opposition. Their message was unified and unequivocal: Ghana’s forests are not for sale.

But successive administrations have treated forest protection not as a national imperative, but as a negotiable transaction. The Akufo-Addo government dismissed years of scientific evidence and public advocacy until economic pressure—particularly from organized labour—forced a reluctant concession. Even then, the response was empty. A repeal instrument was quietly drafted just as Parliament recessed, ensuring no vote could be taken. Meanwhile, 52 peaceful protesters who took to the streets to defend forest reserves were arrested—criminalized for demanding environmental justice.

This episode laid bare a painful truth: Ghana’s political leadership, past and present, has consistently prioritized short-term political and economic interests over the long-term health of its forests. The legacy of LI 2462 stands as a case study in what happens when environmental governance is shaped not by evidence, but by expediency.

The handling of LI 2462 by the previous administration reflected a government that viewed accountability as a threat rather than a duty. For years, the demands of civil society were met with silence. Only when labour unions threatened economic disruption did the state respond. And even then, the government’s actions were calculated to appear responsive without enacting any real change. The arrest of protesters sent a chilling message: ecological preservation would only be tolerated if it didn’t challenge entrenched power.

The current administration has been no less disappointing. Riding on the momentum of repeal advocates and publicly promising to scrap LI 2462, the government reversed course after taking office. What began as a commitment to environmental protection quickly became a bait-and-switch. After initially admitting that the regulation was improperly enacted, the administration now defends it in court, relying on a 2025 legislative amendment—Act 1124—to retroactively legitimize the illegitimate.

This manoeuvre effectively keeps over 90 percent of Ghana’s forest reserves open to mining. It reveals not only a disregard for legal process but a deeper willingness to sacrifice ecological integrity for political convenience.

These twin failures—from outright resistance to strategic deception—demand a complete rethinking of environmental advocacy in Ghana. Civil society can no longer rely solely on traditional methods such as policy dialogues, petitions, and evidence-based reports. These approaches, while valuable, have shown their limitations when faced with entrenched power structures that only respond to pressure.

To achieve real change, advocacy must evolve into a sustained and strategic movement that links environmental protection to broader national interests—such as livelihoods, health, water security, and international credibility. Alliances must be expanded beyond the environmental sector to include labour unions, religious institutions, business communities, and educators. The struggle for forest protection must be reframed not only as a fight for trees, but as a fight for national dignity and generational survival.

Ghana’s international climate commitments must also be brought into focus. The contradiction between domestic policy and global promises should be made a diplomatic issue—affecting climate financing, trade relations, and Ghana’s standing in global sustainability rankings.

Legal avenues must be pursued, not as standalone fixes, but as part of a coordinated resistance that includes visible, persistent public mobilization. The defence of Ghana’s forests must be embedded into institutions, networks, and movements that can outlast political cycles and withstand political pressure.

This fight is not about a single regulation. It is about the power to shape Ghana’s future. Forests continue to fall because political incentives are misaligned. Short-term electoral gains outweigh long-term ecological stability. Until that dynamic changes, forests will continue to pay the price.

But there is still a window for redemption.

President John Dramani Mahama has publicly committed to amending the Minerals and Mining Act (Act 703) to completely prohibit mining in forest reserves. If delivered, this could become one of the most consequential environmental actions ever taken by a Ghanaian leader. It would restore trust, secure vital ecosystems, and safeguard the services our forests provide—from water to carbon sequestration to biodiversity—for generations to come.

The battle over LI 2462 is a stark reminder that meaningful change will not come from political goodwill alone. It will come from unrelenting, coordinated, and bold civic action that refuses to accept forest loss as inevitable.

This is not only a fight for trees—it is a fight for the soul of Ghana’s environmental future.

By Daryl Bosu
Environmentalist & Deputy National Director, A Rocha Ghana

Email: daryl.bosu@arocha.org