Deputy Ranking Member of the Finance Committee of Parliament, Isaac Adongo, has raised concerns that the National Investment Bank (NIB) has not received the level of attention it requires, resulting in its ongoing financial crisis.

During an appearance on the Top Story program on Joy FM, the Member of Parliament for Bolga Central disclosed that the Managing Director of the bank, Samuel Sarpong, has been remotely managing the troubled institution for nearly a year, all the way from Canada.

Mr Adongo attributed this situation to a lack of effective corporate governance, which he believes has contributed to the bank's current predicament.

“We haven’t given NIB the kind of attention that it deserves given that it has been in crisis… the Managing Director sat in Canada and zoom-managed NIB for almost a year. How can we be serious with that?

“A bank that requires arm holding, proper nurturing, the Managing Director sat in Canada for one year and what he was doing was zoom managing that bank. Even very good performing banks cannot be managed by zoom for one year so clearly there are issues,” he said on JoyFM’s Top Story.

“I want to tell you that the bank itself was not established by the Companies Act, it was established by a National Investment Bank Act 612, and that Act is very clear under Section 22 under liquidation proceedings that nobody can liquidate or take any action that will ultimately lead to the demise of NIB unless it comes back to parliament for parliament to pass a law giving direction as to how that process should be pursued.

“So, there’s clearly a legal mandate and that legal mandate rests with the people who set up NIB and it is the parliament of Ghana. So, we don’t expect anything other than a poor regulation action by the Central Bank under Act 930 either to bring it under administration, to revoke the license or to place it under receivership as provided because they have a license of the bank of Ghana.

“But it’s quite clear that’s not the action the Bank of Ghana wants to take, it is not the action the government is interested in, the only action left now is to come under Act 612 and particularly under Section 22 of the Act,” he explained.

Previously, the Member of Parliament (MP) had asserted that the merger proposal served as a camouflage for the eventual sale of both banks, post-merger, to individuals with close ties to the government.

This, according to him, was perceived as a strategy employed in the context of state capture efforts.

"It is clear that this is not about the interest of NIB. This is the last step towards passing through the back door to acquire NIB and ABD for themselves in a state capture," he said.

Previously, the Member of Parliament (MP) had asserted that the merger proposal served as a camouflage for the eventual sale of both banks, post-merger, to individuals with close ties to the government. This, according to him, was perceived as a strategy employed in the context of state capture efforts.

“I don’t think merging NIB and ADB is solving any problem, it is not a solution at all,” he told Evans Mensah.

He pointed out that the National Investment Bank (NIB) has not only been grappling with fiscal challenges but has also faced corporate governance issues, with the roots of the current situation dating back to 2016.

Additionally, he mentioned that the Agricultural Development Bank (ADB) is experiencing similar challenges, as indicated in a 2022 report, and lacks the capacity to absorb the National Investment Bank (NIB). Furthermore, he noted that even if the government were to provide financial support to ADB, it might not be sufficient to cover NIB's outstanding debts.

He suggested that both banks be recapitalised, explaining that “you don’t bring a weak institution to buy a bad institution. You have what we call a good bank buying a bad bank, there is a theory there but the two of them are not good for anything.”