Table of Contents
In the early hours of March 11, 2026, officials from the Ghana Airports Company Limited walked into Terminal 1 of Kotoka International Airport and removed equipment and property belonging to McDan Aviation Limited. The time was approximately 1:00 a.m. The company had secured a court injunction against GACL the previous day. What has followed is the most consequential business dispute in Ghana in 2026, pitting the country's most prominent indigenous conglomerate against a state-owned airport operator, dragging in questions about political interference, indigenous investor protection and the rule of law.
How the deal was structured
In August 2022, McDan Aviation Handling Services Limited signed a licence agreement with GACL that gave it the right to operate a Fixed Base Operation facility at designated areas within Terminal 1 of Kotoka International Airport. A Fixed Base Operation, known in the aviation industry as an FBO, is a ground service provider at an airport that handles private and business aviation. FBOs offer fuelling, hangar space, passenger and crew lounges, customs and immigration clearance, and related services for private jets and business aircraft.
McDan Aviation described the facility as Ghana's first indigenous-owned private FBO terminal, and the company invested millions of dollars in building it out. The terminal offered VIP lounges, crew facilities, a flight planning office, conference rooms, a hangar and in-flight catering, with the added feature of dedicated customs and immigration processing within the building. McKorley positioned it as an asset that elevated Ghana's standing as a hub for business aviation, capable of attracting executives, investors and private jet traffic that would otherwise go to Abidjan, Nairobi or Johannesburg.
In return for those rights, McDan Aviation was required to pay GACL licence fees, royalties and rent.
The default
According to GACL, McDan Aviation began falling behind on its payment obligations almost immediately after the agreement came into effect. The airport operator says it made repeated attempts over the following years to recover the amounts owed, and that those attempts consistently failed to produce sustained compliance.
By late 2024, GACL restricted McDan Aviation's access to Terminal 1 as pressure over the arrears mounted. Under that pressure, McDan Aviation paid its arrears covering 2022 to 2024, which led to the terminal reopening. But the payment relief did not hold. The company subsequently proposed a new payment plan and submitted three post-dated cheques as part of a settlement arrangement. It then asked GACL not to deposit the cheques, citing financial difficulties.
GACL issued another formal reminder in November 2025. The notice period elapsed without resolution, and the airport authority formally terminated the FBO agreement on January 16, 2026. GACL wrote to McDan Aviation clarifying that any payments received after the termination date would be treated solely as partial settlement of the outstanding debt and would not reinstate the contract.
On February 9, 2026, GACL physically secured and locked Terminal 1 and gave McDan Aviation seven days to remove its equipment from the premises. No response came. On February 27, McDan Aviation made a payment of the Ghana cedi equivalent of US$265,000, which GACL said represented approximately half of the total outstanding debt. The airport authority accepted it as partial settlement only. The termination, it said, stood.
The injunction and the midnight entry
McDan Aviation went to the Commercial Division of the High Court in Accra and sought an interlocutory injunction restraining GACL from interfering with its operations. The court served GACL with that motion on March 10, 2026.
Hours later, in the early morning of March 11, GACL officials entered Terminal 1 at approximately 1:00 a.m. and removed what McDan Aviation described as valuable equipment and property belonging to the company. McDan Aviation issued a statement on March 12 calling the entry a deliberate act of contempt for the court process, an unlawful breach of its contractual rights and an attempt to collapse its business.
"On March 10, 2026, GACL was formally served with a court injunction," the company's statement said. "Yet, in the early hours of March 11, 2026, at approximately 1:00 a.m., GACL officials proceeded to forcibly enter the terminal and remove valuable equipment and property belonging to McDan Aviation."
McDan Aviation also argued that even if the termination were legally valid, the contract required GACL to provide 90 days' notice of eviction before taking any action to remove the company from the premises. It said GACL had not provided that notice, constituting a fundamental breach of the contract in its own right.
The company said it was pursuing all available legal remedies for what it characterised as the unlawful termination, breach of contractual rights and contempt of the court injunction.
GACL's position
GACL's statement, also issued on March 12, made no concession on the substance of the dispute. The airport operator maintained that the FBO agreement had been duly and finally terminated, that the termination followed proper notice procedures and that there was no legal basis for McDan Aviation to continue operating at Terminal 1 or to be re-engaged for FBO services.
GACL also disclosed, for the first time publicly, that the McDan Group was simultaneously in a separate legal dispute with the airport authority over a 16-acre parcel of land within the airport enclave. The group had, according to GACL, constructed commercial properties on that land and was renting them out while allegedly owing millions of dollars in related obligations. That dispute had already produced a High Court ruling in May 2025 that granted GACL possession of the land, with the court citing lease violations and $26,296 in unpaid ground rents by McDan subsidiaries, including McDan Shipping Company and Airport Logistics Limited. McDan Group had filed for a stay of execution and launched an appeal.
The political dimension
The dispute has drawn intense public interest in part because of the political context surrounding it. The Mahama administration took office in January 2025. McDan Group's businesses had expanded significantly under the previous Akufo-Addo administration, and McKorley was seen as politically aligned with that era of government.
Reports emerged in early March 2026 that government sources were exploring the reassignment of the Terminal 1 FBO to Ibrahim Mahama, the younger brother of President John Dramani Mahama and one of Ghana's most prominent industrialists. Ibrahim Mahama, who had recently taken delivery of a Bombardier Global 6500 private jet valued at approximately $70 million under his Dzata brand, denied any involvement in plans to take over the terminal. Neither the presidency nor the Ministry of Transport made a public statement on the reports.
The Paramount Chief of the Sempe Traditional Area, Nii Adote Otintor II, weighed in on behalf of McKorley, calling the GACL action a hostile takeover and warning that the optics of the dispute sent damaging signals to indigenous Ghanaian investors. "When local investors feel unsafe in their own country, we kill the motivation for future generations to take plausible investment risks," the chief said.
McKorley's response
McKorley himself has not made a direct public statement on the Terminal 1 dispute. On March 24, he published a message on social media that did not reference the controversy by name but whose timing was unmistakable.
"You need to deeply convince yourself that you can get through anything that life throws at you because that's what you do," he wrote. "You take the hit, you adapt, you get back on your feet, and you get moving again. Life throws curveballs at you, so what? You take the punch and swing back."
McDan Aviation's legal challenge is pending before the Commercial Division of the High Court. The company is seeking a declaration that the termination of the licence was unlawful, a declaration that the closure of its Terminal 1 operations was illegal and damages for losses suffered from the shutdown. The matter is unresolved and the courtroom is now the arena in which the dispute will play out.
