The National Pensions Regulatory Authority (NPRA) has dismissed claims made by the Minority in Parliament, which allege that its Chief Executive Officer, Chris Boadi-Mensah, increased his salary upon taking office.
These allegations were presented during a press conference on Thursday, April 16, by Vincent Ekow Assafuah, the Member of Parliament for Old Tafo.
In his address to the media, the MP asserted that Mr. Boadi-Mensah had independently raised his salary shortly after his appointment in February 2025, at a time when the NPRA Board had not yet been established.
The Authority swiftly responded with a counter press release to clarify the context regarding the CEO’s salary.
The NPRA stated that the claims made by the MP are incorrect and do not accurately represent the decisions made before the current administration of the Authority.
The regulator clarified that the salary adjustments mentioned by the MP were actually approved before Mr. Boadi-Mensah took office.
The NPRA highlighted that a 25 per cent salary increase had been sanctioned in September 2024, with the implementation set to commence on January 1, 2025, weeks before Mr. Boadi-Mensah was appointed CEO.
Reiterating its stance, the NPRA declared that “The claim that Mr. Chris Boadi-Mensah doubled his salary upon assuming office is completely untrue. The last Board, under the immediate past government, approved a 25% salary increment in September 2024, effective 1st January 2025, before he assumed office. This approval happened under the previous management. It was based on this new salary structure that the exit packages of the former executives were paid”.
“Therefore, the claim by Mr. Assafuah that Mr. Boadi-Mensah doubled his salary upon the assumption of office is entirely false and unsubstantiated. A little bit of due diligence on the part of Mr. Assafuah would have established this fact.”
The Authority stressed that the current salary structure is a continuation of decisions made by its former leadership and is not the result of any unilateral action by the current CEO.
Additionally, the Authority suggested that the claims may have stemmed from a misunderstanding or lack of verification of the facts surrounding the approved remuneration framework.
