Enforcement actions are paused until April 1, 2026, to support young entrepreneurs while enhancing consumer protections amid the growth of ride-hailing and food delivery apps.

The GoldBod Jewellery, a subsidiary of Ghana’s state-backed Ghana Gold Board, on Tuesday October 28, 2025 appointed media executive Bola Ray and actress Joselyn Dumas as brand ambassadors to promote premium gold, diamond, and luxury jewelry across Africa.

GoldBod Jewellery Names Bola Ray and Joselyn Dumas as Brand Ambassadors

The collaboration is designed to highlight Ghanaian innovation, craftsmanship, and ethical sourcing in jewellery design. It aligns with President John Dramani Mahama’s vision to transform Ghana into Africa’s premier center for gold ornaments and luxury accessories. GoldBod Jewellery focuses on fine gold and diamond pieces, bespoke ornaments, and refined accessories.

Role Of Ambassadors

• Bola Ray: Known for his charisma and influence in media (as CEO of EIB Network and a radio/TV host), he will help drive media engagements and public outreach to showcase the brand’s collections.
•  
• Joselyn Dumas: Celebrated for her elegance and roles in films like Perfect Picture, she will embody the brand’s sophistication, leading campaigns that blend tradition with modern luxury.

Joselyn Dumas

CEO’s Statement

Sammy Gyamfi, Esq., Chief Executive Officer of GoldBod Jewellery, emphasized that “Bola Ray and Joselyn Dumas represent excellence and authenticity—the very values that define the GoldBod Jewellery brand.” He described the move as a “major milestone” in promoting local value addition to Ghana’s gold resources.

Background on GoldBod Jewellery

GoldBod is a government-backed initiative under the Ghana Gold Board, dedicated to adding value to the nation’s abundant gold reserves through high-quality, ethically produced jewellery.

The brand targets both domestic and international markets, emphasizing sustainability and cultural pride. This ambassador announcement marks an early step in expanding its global footprint.

• Disruption of Free Trade: ECOWAS facilitates the free movement of goods and services among its members. The withdrawal of these countries means they might no longer benefit from the free trade agreements, potentially leading to tariffs on goods crossing borders, which could increase costs and reduce trade volumes.
• Loss of Market Access: These countries will lose access to the broader ECOWAS market, which might restrict their economic activities, particularly for landlocked nations like Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, who depend on their neighbors for trade routes.
• Impact on WAEMU: While leaving ECOWAS does not necessarily mean leaving the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), there’s a risk if they consider exiting this union as well. The economic fallout would be much greater, potentially leading to defaults on commercial debt issued in the WAEMU market. However, the likelihood of this is considered low by analysts.

• Reduced Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): Membership in ECOWAS can be an assurance for investors regarding political stability and economic integration. Withdrawal might deter investors, especially given the political uncertainty following coups in these countries.
• Financial Isolation: There’s a risk of exclusion from critical financial regulatory frameworks, impacting investment inflows, economic stability, and long-term development prospects. Being on the FATF grey list, their financial systems could face further scrutiny or restrictions.

• ECOWAS Sanctions: The countries had already experienced harsh economic and financial sanctions from ECOWAS due to coups, which included banking restrictions and trade embargoes. While leaving ECOWAS might remove these sanctions directly, the underlying political instability might continue to affect their economies.
• Potential for New Sanctions: If these nations pursue policies contrary to regional or international norms, they might face new forms of sanctions, either from ECOWAS or other international bodies, further straining their economies.

• Aid Flows: Withdrawal might affect the flow of regional aid for development projects, exacerbating poverty and humanitarian issues. ECOWAS has various programs aimed at economic and social development, and the absence from these could have long-term negative effects on the populace.

• Security Costs: The security situation in these countries has been a significant concern, with terrorism and insurgency affecting economic activities. Without ECOWAS’s coordinated security efforts, these nations might need to invest more in security, diverting funds from economic development.
• Migration and Labor: The free movement of people within ECOWAS has economic benefits through labor mobility. Restrictions on this could affect industries in these countries that rely on migrant labor, potentially leading to labor shortages or increased costs.

• Economic Independence or Isolation: While these countries aim for greater sovereignty, they might find themselves economically isolated without the regional support structure of ECOWAS. This could lead to increased economic challenges, particularly if they cannot secure alternative alliances or economic frameworks.
• Alliance of Sahel States (AES): The formation of AES might provide some counterbalance, but its effectiveness in replacing ECOWAS’s economic benefits remains uncertain, especially given the nascent stage of this alliance.