General News
GHATOF Members Demand Answers Over World Cup Visa Fees, Expanded Beneficiary List
Allegations surrounding the management of visa arrangements for Ghanaian tourism industry players seeking to attend activities related to the 2026 FIFA World Cup have triggered fresh questions about transparency and accountability at the Ghana Tourism Authority (GTA).
The controversy centres on allegations by the President of the Ghana Tourism Federation (GHATOF) concerning visa fees paid by members, discrepancies in the list of applicants submitted for processing, and the inclusion of additional names whose identities and affiliations have been questioned.
The concerns were highlighted in a Facebook post by Vincent Ekow Assafuah, who called on GTA Chief Executive Officer Maame Efua Houadjeto to provide answers regarding the handling of the arrangements.
According to the allegations outlined in the post, GHATOF was initially allocated four slots for the World Cup-related trip, but the number was subsequently increased to 20.
Members reportedly paid GH¢2,000 each to Maame Efua towards the visa arrangements. However, some applicants allegedly discovered at the embassy that their visa fees had not been paid, raising questions about the handling of the money collected.
The post questioned whether the fees had been remitted to the embassy and, if not, what had happened to the funds. It also called for the affected members to receive refunds where payments had not been made.
Another major concern raised in the post involves an alleged discrepancy between the list of applicants submitted by GHATOF and the names that eventually appeared on the visa list.
According to the allegations, GHATOF submitted 20 names, but members later discovered in Accra that the list had expanded to 50, with an additional 30 individuals reportedly listed under the name “Ahwele Dancing Group.”
The post stated that preliminary checks had not established the existence of the group, prompting questions about the identities of the individuals listed under its name and the basis on which they were included.
The GHATOF President also reportedly alleged that individuals who were neither affiliated with the Ghana Tourism Authority nor employed by the institution had been included in the arrangements.
These claims have raised questions about who authorised the additional names, the criteria used to select beneficiaries and whether the allocation process followed established procedures.
However, the allegations have not, in themselves, established that any funds were misappropriated or that the additional names were unlawfully included.
In remarks captured in the video accompanying the Facebook post, the GHATOF President expressed disappointment over the difficulties encountered by members during the visa process.
He said members had been approached months earlier and subsequently informed that their visa fees had not been paid. He added that many applicants, including himself, were told that their names were not even on the relevant form.
The President also described the situation as embarrassing for tourism industry players who had travelled from different parts of the country to participate in the arrangements.
“It is unfortunate, it is embarrassing, it is very disappointing for people to travel from Sunyani all the way to Takoradi,” he said.
The GHATOF President further apologised for the situation and indicated that the matter required attention, stressing that the experience was unacceptable to those affected.
His comments reflected concerns about the treatment of industry players and the potential damage to confidence in arrangements intended to support Ghana’s tourism sector.
During the same remarks, the GHATOF President stated that the visa fees had been paid in the afternoon.
He said any money that had been collected from members but was required to be returned should be refunded immediately.
“It is on record that the visa fees were paid in the afternoon. So, any money that was given to come back immediately, it has to come back,” he said.
He described this as an assurance to the affected members and indicated that the governing council would take a decision on the way forward.
He also suggested that another press conference could be organised if necessary to address the matter.
The remarks introduce an important issue requiring clarification: the precise status of the visa payments, including when the fees were paid, which applicants were covered and whether any outstanding amounts remain to be refunded.
The available remarks do not fully establish the payment timeline or resolve the questions surrounding the funds reportedly collected from members.
Pressure for transparency and accountability
The controversy comes at a time when tourism industry stakeholders are seeking clarity on how opportunities linked to the 2026 FIFA World Cup were allocated and administered.
For GHATOF members who reportedly paid towards the visa arrangements, the immediate concerns include whether their payments were properly accounted for, why some applicants allegedly found their names missing and how the final list came to contain 50 names instead of the 20 reportedly submitted by the federation.
The allegations also raise questions about the process used to identify beneficiaries and the involvement of individuals outside the Ghana Tourism Authority.
Maame Efua Houadjeto is being called upon to clarify the circumstances surrounding the visa fees, explain the reported expansion of the list and identify the individuals associated with the additional 30 names.
The Ghana Tourism Authority’s response would be important in establishing the facts, including the amount collected, the payments made to the embassy, the final list of applicants and the procedures followed in selecting beneficiaries.
Until the relevant records and responses are made available, the claims remain allegations that require verification.
For the affected tourism operators, a clear explanation and an account of the money collected could help address the concerns raised and restore confidence in the management of opportunities intended for the industry.