Ablakwa Defends SA Evacuation Spending Amid Parliamentary Scrutiny Over GHC49.7m Cost

Foreign Affairs Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa has pushed back strongly against parliamentary scrutiny of the South Africa evacuation expenditure, insisting that his ministry has acted transparently and that no funds have gone missing from the GHC49.7 million operation that brought nearly 2,000 Ghanaians home earlier this year.

Speaking on JoyNews' Newsfile on Saturday, October 17, 2026, Mr Ablakwa expressed frustration with the Minority's handling of concerns regarding the costs, characterising their approach as a calculated attempt to damage both his personal reputation and the ministry's credibility. He argued that suggesting missing funds implies Ghanaians should hold him personally responsible for allegedly unaccounted amounts, which he firmly denies.

The tension centres on perceived expenditure anomalies totalling approximately GHC16 million that the Minority has flagged, prompting calls for a comprehensive audit. However, Ablakwa contends that such allegations, even when framed as requests for further scrutiny, have already inflicted unnecessary reputational damage on the Foreign Affairs Ministry before any substantive investigation has occurred.

The South Africa Evacuation: Timeline and Scale

Between May 27 and September 4, 2026, Ghana conducted a major evacuation operation responding to renewed xenophobic violence and intimidation targeting foreign nationals in South Africa. The Ministry coordinated the safe return of 1,964 Ghanaians during this period, with the total operation costed at GHC49,721,786.

In response to parliamentary oversight requests, the ministry submitted a detailed report exceeding 200 pages to the Deputy Ranking Member of Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, Nana Asafo-Adjei Ayeh. The comprehensive submission included evacuees' contact details and signatures, intended to demonstrate accountability and transparency in the execution of the programme.

Why It Matters for Ghana

This dispute reflects broader tensions between the government and parliamentary opposition regarding ministerial accountability and public fund management. Ghana has historically struggled with perceptions of financial mismanagement in major state operations, making public confidence in government spending critical to institutional credibility.

The evacuation itself represented a significant diplomatic and logistical undertaking, signalling Ghana's commitment to protecting its citizens abroad during periods of regional instability. However, the subsequent parliamentary questions underscore the importance of rigorous financial oversight, even for operations undertaken in citizens' interests.

Ranking Member Samuel Abu Jinapor clarified that the Minority had not accused the Minister of personal wrongdoing, but rather sought clarification on expenditure anomalies through proper audit channels. This distinction is important, as it reflects standard parliamentary practice of financial scrutiny rather than allegations of corruption.

The row also highlights ongoing governance challenges in how government and opposition navigate legitimate oversight without unnecessarily damaging institutional reputation. For Ghanaians, the underlying question remains: how can parliament ensure taxpayer money is properly accounted for whilst maintaining institutional trust in both the executive and legislative branches?

With the detailed report now submitted, the Foreign Affairs Committee's examination of the documentation will likely determine whether the perceived anomalies represent genuine accounting issues requiring resolution or simply reflect the complexities inherent in coordinating a large-scale emergency evacuation.