In Defense of Amna Mirghani (1)

As I See 

Adel El-Baz

1

Let me put before the reader from the outset what some may see as the reason behind this defense: Yes, Amna Mirghani was a fellow student of mine, and the bond of collegiality has its due respect. I have known her since our university days as one of the brightest students in our cohort. After graduation, she embarked on a long professional career, during which she built genuine banking expertise from within the Central Bank of Sudan itself, before broadening her experience in the banking sector outside the bank.

Therefore, when I defend her today, I do so out of respect for both collegiality and truth. A colleague has a duty to speak the truth when he sees another colleague subjected to what he believes is an unfair attack. At the same time, if that colleague is at fault, he must not allow collegiality to become a shield concealing the mistake.

Had my objection to Mr. Al-Tahir Satti’s article, “Fixing the Salary,” concerned a monetary policy in which Amna had failed, a decision that had harmed the economy, or a failure that could be demonstrated with figures, collegiality would not have prevented me from criticizing her. But when the Central Bank Governor is judged not on her policies and their outcomes, but on her salary; when her salary is presented as though it were a privilege she had invented for herself; and when the review of monetary policies in a turbulent wartime economy is treated, in itself, as evidence of “confusion,” then remaining silent in the face of injustice becomes a betrayal of both collegiality and truth.

We may disagree with Amna, and we may hold her accountable—indeed, we must hold her accountable. But let us hold her accountable for what she has actually done, not for what we wish to attribute to her.

I am not asking Al-Tahir, or anyone else, to flatter Amna, nor am I asking that she be shielded from criticism. On the contrary, the Governor of the Central Bank of Sudan should be subject to the closest scrutiny from the press and the public, because the decisions issued from her office affect the livelihood of every Sudanese citizen.

But there is a major difference between criticism and persecution, between accountability and personal disparagement, and between dismantling a monetary policy through figures and turning an employee’s salary into evidence of personal guilt.

The bond of collegiality motivates me to defend her, yes. But what gives this defense its legitimacy is not collegiality—it is the facts. If the facts prove tomorrow that she was wrong, I will say that she was wrong. As for today, what I see is that an important part of what she is being subjected to is not fair criticism of her policies, but rather an attack unsupported by the evidence needed to justify its severity.

(1)

My friend, journalist Al-Tahir Satti, launched a fierce attack today on Central Bank of Sudan Governor Amna Mirghani, choosing an undeniably provocative entry point: the Governor’s salary and benefits.

Transparency regarding a salary is one thing; turning the salary alone into grounds for political or professional condemnation is quite another. The question is not simply: How much does she earn? Rather: Was her remuneration approved in accordance with the law? And have her policies produced outcomes that can be measured and debated?

Al-Tahir did not raise the salary issue in isolation. Rather, he sought to ask: How can the Governor receive all this money while the Sudanese pound continues to decline and the Central Bank appears to be stumbling in its policies?

That is a legitimate question. But the answer does not begin by comparing the salary of the Central Bank Governor with that of a teacher, doctor, or soldier. Such a comparison may be emotionally powerful, but it is unfair and tells us little from an economic standpoint.

The right question is: How much should we pay someone entrusted with the national currency, the country’s reserves, the banking system, monetary policy, and the foreign-exchange market? And what is the value of such expertise in regional and international banking markets?

(2)

Let us begin with the figure that angered Al-Tahir.

According to the figures he himself cited, Amna Mirghani’s monthly salary is 44 million Sudanese pounds. He then added allowances equivalent to eight months’ salary for annual leave, six months for the two Eid holidays, five months for clothing, ten months as an annual incentive, and nine months for medical expenses.

Let us calculate these figures rather than be alarmed by them.

These allowances, combined with the twelve monthly salaries, amount to 50 monthly salaries per year. Multiply 50 by 44 million pounds, and the total cited by Al-Tahir comes to 2.2 billion Sudanese pounds annually.

At the exchange rate cited by Al-Tahir himself—6,300 Sudanese pounds to the US dollar—that amounts to approximately $349,000 per year.

Is that really excessive when compared with some members of the boards of directors of state-owned companies who meet only twice a year yet receive $160,000, or when compared with the international labor market from which Amna Mirghani came?

Let us see.

(3)

Before Amna came to this chaotic and battered country, she was working in the banking sector outside Sudan, at the Bank of Sahel and Sahara, where her income and benefits were considerably higher than what she receives today.

When she was asked to return and take charge of the Central Bank of Sudan, she did not hesitate or ask about her benefits. Amna was not an unemployed woman looking for a job. She was a banker giving up an international financial package to enter a country at war, whose currency was collapsing, whose resources were scarce, and whose central bank was operating under conditions in which perhaps no other central bank in the world has had to work.

This reality should be taken into account before focusing on the 44 million Sudanese pounds, which, at today’s parallel-market exchange rate, amount to approximately $7,000.

(4)

Let us step outside Sudan for a moment.

In Africa, salaries vary according to the size of the economy, the market for expertise, and the degree of transparency. But the principle is the same: a central bank governor is not an ordinary civil servant.

In South Africa, the total remuneration received by the Governor of the South African Reserve Bank, Lesetja Kganyago, during the 2023/2024 financial year amounted to approximately 9.72 million South African rand, including salary, recurring benefits, and other benefits. At the average 2024 exchange rate, this was equivalent to approximately $530,000 annually, or around $44,000 per month.

Does that mean South Africa has “fixed the bank governor’s salary without fixing the conditions of South African citizens”?

Of course not.

They simply understand that institutions managing money and financial markets need professionals who could tomorrow move to institutions offering several times as much.

The point is that managing monetary policy, reserves, and the banking sector is a highly specialized position carrying enormous responsibility. The remuneration of the person occupying such a position should therefore be assessed on the basis of the law, the scale of responsibility, and the market for expertise—not through a literal comparison with the salaries of other government employees. Such a comparison is an oversimplification that cannot withstand serious economic scrutiny.

Therefore, the serious question remains: Was the Governor’s salary and benefits determined by a competent authority and supported by a clear legal basis? And can her policies and decisions be held accountable through specific results and measurable figures?

As for making the salary itself evidence of her responsibility for the decline in…

(5)

More importantly, the Central Bank of Sudan Act itself does not treat the Governor as an ordinary civil servant.

Article 9 of the Central Bank of Sudan Act provides for the appointment of the Governor and two deputies from among those possessing the “qualifications, competence, and experience,” and stipulates that the authority appointing them shall determine their terms of service.

The law also requires the Governor to devote all of his or her professional time to the bank and, as a general rule, prohibits the Governor from holding another position or engaging in any other work, whether paid or unpaid.

Therefore, the Governor’s contract is not simply a “job grade” on a government payroll. It is a contract for one of the most consequential economic positions in the state. Determining its remuneration falls to the authority that appointed the Governor and entrusted her with the position—an authority that knows her qualifications, competence, and what salary and benefits she deserves.

To be continued.