Speaking at the Afreximbank Annual Meetings in Abuja, Akufo-Addo argued current ratings impose unjust risk premiums: “We pay more for capital not due to failures, but our geography.”

His stance gained traction following Fitch’s recent downgrade of Afreximbank—a key crisis lender—partly linked to sovereign debt restructurings in Ghana and Zambia.

Proponents contend an African-led agency would better reflect contextual realities like informal economies, climate vulnerabilities, and development needs. They argue it could reassess institutions like Afreximbank more fairly, potentially lowering borrowing costs and strengthening domestic capital markets.

However, critics warn of credibility hurdles: Without global recognition, ratings may lack market acceptance, forcing continued reliance on established agencies. Some experts caution against perceived politicization, stressing any new entity must prioritize technical rigor and independence.

The debate extends beyond alleged bias to methodological gaps. While African leaders accuse agencies of systemic prejudice, analysts note rating frameworks—designed for developed economies—often overlook structural realities.

Alternatives include reforming global methodologies with African input or adopting dual-rating systems to build continental agency legitimacy.

The African Union has endorsed the initiative, with feasibility studies underway. Success hinges on creating a technically robust, well-resourced institution capable of earning investor trust—a critical step as Africa seeks greater sovereignty in global finance systems.