Workers of the Bogoso–Prestea Mine concerned about false publications have strongly dismissed a document currently circulating and purported to be a petition from the Divisional Chiefs of the Bogoso–Prestea Traditional Area, describing it as false, misleading, and deliberately staged to deceive the public.
According to the workers, the so-called letter does not reflect the current position, actions, or engagements of the Traditional Authorities.
They point out that just last week, the Chiefs were physically present at the Bogoso–Prestea Mine, where they engaged positively, interacted freely, and demonstrated visible support for ongoing developments. The atmosphere during that visit, they stress, was one of cooperation—not conflict—directly contradicting the tone and content of the circulating document.
The workers further raised concern over what they describe as a worrying pattern. Only last week, another so-called “revocation letter” surfaced and was later exposed as false. Now, within days, a similar document has appeared, raising serious questions about a coordinated attempt to misinform the public.
“This is not a coincidence. This is a calculated effort,” the workers emphasized.
They indicated that there is strong reason to believe that illegal mining interests and their collaborators may be behind these fabricated releases, with the intention to create confusion, incite tension, and disrupt lawful and legitimate operations at Bogoso.
The workers are therefore urging all stakeholders, media houses, and the general public to treat the document with utmost skepticism and ensure proper verification through official channels before accepting or amplifying such claims.
They maintained that the Bogoso–Prestea Mine remains a strategic national asset and warned that any attempt to destabilize its operations through falsehoods must be firmly rejected.
Reaffirming their position, the workers stressed that the Chiefs were recently at the site, engagements have been constructive, and the circulating letter lacks credibility.
Ghanaians, they concluded, deserve facts—not fabrications.
