Ghana’s political class is finally getting some long overdue scrutiny, and now IMANI has decided it wants to sit in moral judgment over everyone else’s money. It wants to track the wealth of public officials, probe where their assets come from, and present itself as a watchdog of integrity. Fine, But there is a basic question we are not supposed to ask: who is tracking IMANI? We are expected to accept, without blinking, that an outfit plugged into the donor circuit and tightly networked with foreign foundations and interests is somehow above the very standards it wants to impose on others. It wants sunlight for politicians but shade for itself. It demands declarations from public officials while refusing to open its own books in any detailed, meaningful way. That is not transparency; it is elite exemption dressed up as activism.
If IMANI wants to scrutinise power, it must first admit that it is itself a centre of power. It shapes narratives. It frames what the public should think about policy, corruption, elections and governance. It influences which issues dominate the airwaves and which ones quietly disappear. That is real power. And whenever an organisation holds that kind of influence in a poor, aid dependent country like Ghana, the question is simple: who pays for the megaphone? The Ghanaian public has a right to know, down to the last significant cedi and dollar, which foreign governments, foundations and “development partners” bankroll IMANI’s operations, reports and campaigns. We have a right to know how much each donor gives every year, which projects they underwrite, and what strings are attached. We have a right to see audited accounts, not occasional vague slogans about “support from partners”. Anything less is opacity, not accountability.
In a country where foreign money quietly seeps into NGOs, think tanks and media, shaping agendas that may or may not align with Ghana’s long term interests, no one gets a pass. If IMANI wants to turn the floodlights on others, it must be willing to stand under those same lights. No special treatment, no moral high ground. Full donor lists, full amounts, full purposes, and routine public reporting – exactly what it now insists politicians and officials must face.This is why some of us are calling for a Ghana style foreign agents disclosure framework. If you are funded by, or effectively working in the interests of, foreign governments or foundations while intervening in our politics and public debates, you should be required by law to declare that relationship clearly and publicly. That includes IMANI. That includes every outfit that lives off foreign cheques while claiming to speak for “the people”.
You do not get to lecture an entire country on transparency while hiding your own financial umbilical cords. If IMANI truly believes in accountability, it can start by submitting itself to the exact same level of scrutiny it is demanding from everyone else. Until that happens, Ghanaians are justified in asking a very uncomfortable question: whose script are they really reading from?
Who Is Tracking IMANI?
Ghana’s political class is finally getting some long overdue scrutiny, and now IMANI has decided it wants to sit in moral judgment over everyone else’s money. It wants to track the wealth of public officials, probe where their assets come from, and present itself as a watchdog of integrity. Fine, But there is a basic question we are not supposed to ask: who is tracking IMANI? We are expected to accept, without blinking, that an outfit plugged into the donor circuit and tightly networked with foreign foundations and interests is somehow above the very standards it wants to impose on others. It wants sunlight for politicians but shade for itself. It demands declarations from public officials while refusing to open its own books in any detailed, meaningful way. That is not transparency; it is elite exemption dressed up as activism.
If IMANI wants to scrutinise power, it must first admit that it is itself a centre of power. It shapes narratives. It frames what the public should think about policy, corruption, elections and governance. It influences which issues dominate the airwaves and which ones quietly disappear. That is real power. And whenever an organisation holds that kind of influence in a poor, aid dependent country like Ghana, the question is simple: who pays for the megaphone? The Ghanaian public has a right to know, down to the last significant cedi and dollar, which foreign governments, foundations and “development partners” bankroll IMANI’s operations, reports and campaigns. We have a right to know how much each donor gives every year, which projects they underwrite, and what strings are attached. We have a right to see audited accounts, not occasional vague slogans about “support from partners”. Anything less is opacity, not accountability.
In a country where foreign money quietly seeps into NGOs, think tanks and media, shaping agendas that may or may not align with Ghana’s long term interests, no one gets a pass. If IMANI wants to turn the floodlights on others, it must be willing to stand under those same lights. No special treatment, no moral high ground. Full donor lists, full amounts, full purposes, and routine public reporting – exactly what it now insists politicians and officials must face.This is why some of us are calling for a Ghana style foreign agents disclosure framework. If you are funded by, or effectively working in the interests of, foreign governments or foundations while intervening in our politics and public debates, you should be required by law to declare that relationship clearly and publicly. That includes IMANI. That includes every outfit that lives off foreign cheques while claiming to speak for “the people”.
You do not get to lecture an entire country on transparency while hiding your own financial umbilical cords. If IMANI truly believes in accountability, it can start by submitting itself to the exact same level of scrutiny it is demanding from everyone else. Until that happens, Ghanaians are justified in asking a very uncomfortable question: whose script are they really reading from?