The former Chief Executive Officer of the now-collapsed Menzgold Ghana Limited, Nana Appiah Mensah, popularly known as NAM 1, has told the High Court that the Bank of Ghana provided guidance to his businesses regarding their structure and operations.

NAM 1 is currently facing trial over allegations that he used his companies to lure and defraud more than 16,000 people.

Taking the witness stand to present his defence, he responded to questions from his counsel, Paa Joy A. Boateng, during examination-in-chief concerning the registration and licensing status of Menzgold Ghana Limited.

He informed the court that the company was first incorporated as Menzbank Ghana Company Limited, with ambitions of becoming the first bullion bank in West Africa, and possibly across Africa.

According to NAM 1, the Central Bank at some point published a list of unlicensed microfinance institutions which included Menzbank.

“In response, Menzbank’s in-house counsel wrote to the BoG, citing the publication in the dailies and informing them that Menzbank was not a microfinance institution, requesting that our name be expunged from the list,” he said.

He stated that the Central Bank subsequently asked for documentation and invited him for a meeting.

“As a law-abiding entity, we submitted the Precious Minerals Marketing Company (PMMC) licence and all other documentation they requested, which they acknowledged.

"Menzgold was subsequently given an opportunity in the meeting, chaired by Mr Amoh Awuah and other officers of the Central Bank, to adequately address the issues, which we did to the best of our ability,” NAM 1 said, explaining that the firm was still operating under the name Menzbank at the time.

He told the court that the issue of being listed as an unlicensed microfinance institution was resolved during the meeting, attributing the mix-up to the company’s name, which suggested it was a financial services provider.

NAM 1 testified that officials of the Central Bank recommended a minor modification to the company’s name.

“So more specifically, our team and that of the Central Bank collectively resolved that Menzbank with a ‘k’ would be changed to Menzbanc with a ‘c’ to ensure consistency, which is a cardinal element in business administration. So Menzbank was changed to Menzbanc on the advice of the BoG,” he said.

He further indicated that months later, the Central Bank organised another meeting to address public uncertainty about whether Menzbanc was a licensed financial institution.

“This was because the name ‘Menzbanc’ depicted a financial institution, and members of the public often called the Central Bank to enquire. Secondly, our gold jewellery products and tablets, which buyers could trade for extra value, gave the semblance of financial investment,” he explained.

NAM 1 said that after deliberations, the Central Bank directed that the sale of gold jewellery products be separated from gold trading activities to eliminate confusion.

“In effect, it was the Bank of Ghana that advised the setting up of Brew Marketing Consult,” NAM 1 said.

The court adjourned the matter to March 5, 2026, for the continuation of his evidence-in-chief.

Earlier this month, the High Court in Accra directed Nana Appiah Mensah, popularly known as NAM 1, to file his witness statement by February 9, 2026, after dismissing a motion seeking a stay of proceedings in his criminal case involving alleged illegal gold trading through Menzgold Ghana Limited.

The ruling was delivered by Justice Ernest Owusu-Dapaa following the withdrawal of the application, which had been filed on January 13, 2026.

NAM 1 is facing prosecution alongside other individuals and corporate entities in a multi-accused trial arising from the operations of Menzgold Ghana Limited.

During proceedings on Monday, February 2, 2026, his lawyer, Paa Joy Akuamoah Boateng, told the court that the motion for a stay had become ineffective after a related judicial review before the Supreme Court was discontinued.

He argued that the pending High Court motion had become “negatory” due to the withdrawal of the substantive application and asked the court to strike it out.

The prosecution, led by Senior State Attorney Watkins Adama, did not object, describing the withdrawal as a procedural step that did not prejudice the case.

The court noted that although an appeal against a summary of proceedings remains pending, it does not halt the trial.

In its ruling, Justice Owusu-Dapaa ordered that the trial “shall proceed” and directed NAM 1 to continue with his evidence-in-chief. The court also instructed him and the other accused to submit any proposed documentary evidence at least three days before the next hearing.

In his testimony, NAM 1 told the court that Menzgold Ghana Limited was incorporated under Ghanaian law to engage in gold mining, buying, value addition, and export.

He acknowledged that these activities required regulatory licences and stated that the company held the necessary approvals at the time of operation. He explained that obtaining such licences involved documentation, payment of statutory fees, and regulatory assessment.

NAM 1 added that the regulatory framework later changed when the role of the Precious Minerals Marketing Company (PMMC) shifted from licensing to national assay functions.

He further said that although Menzgold had incorporation and licensing documents, he could not access some of them after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shut down the company and law enforcement agencies sealed its offices.

According to the accused, this affected his ability to retrieve documents essential for his defence, a situation he noted could be verified by the relevant state institutions.

The court reiterated that NAM 1 must file his witness statement by February 9, 2026, as part of the ongoing proceedings.

Background

NAM 1, together with Menzgold Ghana Limited and Brew Marketing Consult Ghana Limited, is facing 39 counts, including dealing in gold without authorisation, engaging in deposit-taking without a licence, inducement to invest, defrauding by false pretence, fraudulent breach of trust, and money laundering.

Prosecutors allege that between 2016 and 2018, the accused defrauded customers of GH¢340,835,650. He has denied all the charges and is currently on GH¢500 million bail with four sureties.