In 2016, Ghana produced 900,000 metric tonnes of cocoa beans for the international market, and part of the success has been attributed to the application of lithovit liquid fertilizer on mature cocoa trees.
Dr Gilbert Anim Kwapong, a former Executive Director of the Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG), said in the three years that lithovit liquid fertiliser was applied to cocoa trees, there was no adverse or negative impact on cocoa beans, but the country experienced a great output.
Testifying as the 8th Defence Witness (DW8) for Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni, a former Chief Executive of Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), he said during the period 2014 and 2016, the quality of Ghana’s cocoa beans continued to it being used as the benchmark on the international market.
He, therefore, told the Accra High Court, presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh, on Monday, 18th December, 2023 that it is not true for anyone to suggest that Ghana’s cocoa yields went down because of lithovit, and with that the efficacy of lithovit is not in question.
According to him, CRIG’s own assessment that enables them to renew certificates indicated that Lithovit met the requirements of the Committee for Testing Chemicals and Machines (CTCM), and, therefore, recommended that the certificate of the product be renewed.
He added that the assertion that the testing of fertilizer must last at least three years before it is certified is wrong, explaining that the Scientists have procedures for testing fertilisers and during the process, if they find it appropriate to terminate the trial at a certain point, they do so and draw their conclusions.
This answer was in response to a question posed to him by Benson Nutsukpi, Counsel for the other accused persons – Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited – during cross-examination.
The question was purposed to neutralise an assertion by Dr Yaw Adu Ampomah, 3rd Prosecution Witness (PW3), that lithovit did not go through the full three years testing period and that, the process was micro managed by Dr. Opuni in favour of the supplier of lithovit, Mr. Agongo and his company.
The Witness added that CRIG Scientists are always determined to prolong testing of agro-chemicals for several seasons, if their active ingredients are novel, but same does not apply to the molecules that they know. The product will, however, be benchmarked against their standard.
Dr Kwapong added that while they have had cause to discipline some Scientists who deviated from the practiced norm, the Adu Ampomah ad-hoc committee’s recommendations has the potential to undermine the hard won reputation of CRIG as a center of excellence, for developing technologies that enables all stakeholders to achieve the objectives of the Ghana cocoa industry.
He said undermining the credibility of the Scientists who carried out chemical and machine testing at CRIG is an indictment that would go a long way to damage CRIG’s reputation.
DW8 added that CRIG takes all the necessary professional steps to ensure the integrity of its test.
Mr Nutsukpi told the court that fertilizers such as Bi Grow Liquid Fertilizer, Cocoa Sett, So Abapa, Number 10 and Acarp Compost for raising cocoa seedlings, Fertegre Cacao Super, Cocoa Wura and Green OK, just like Lithovit, the testing periods were between one and two years.
Counsel added that the records of these agrochemical testing periods defy the logic of the three years established CRIG protocol, suggested by PW3, who also was a former deputy Chief Executive of Agronomy and Quality Control (A&QC) at COCOBOD.
He later became a Special Adviser on Cocoa to the then Minister for Food and Agriculture, Dr Afriyie Akoto.
He also believed that his clients are being targeted, as none of the products that did not meet three years assumed testing period had been a matter of concerned to the prosecution.
The following are excerpts of the cross-examination
Q…
A. My Lord I didn’t have the privilege of seeing previous…but chemical testing at CRIG is an important component of the work we do at CRIG. I believe that information on chemicals testing being part of the handing over notes is very important because that provides a lead or guide on chemical testing to anyone who is taking over.
Q. But the one prepared by Dr F.M Amoah did not have this component?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Please tell this honourable court if you can remember who gave you the directive to give your handing over notes to the president’s representative at COCOBD?
A. I received my letter on the 20th January, 2017 informing me of my transfer from CRIG to Cocoa House. And in that letter, I was directed to hand over to His Excellence the President’s representative at the Ghana Cocoa Board.
Q. Sir, can you remember who signed the letter?
A. My Lord, I cannot recall.
Q. Please in the normal course of operation at CRIG, who is your direct boss and who do you report to?
A. My Lord, my direct boss is the deputy Chief Executive in charge of Agronomy and Quality Control, and it is the office I report to.
Q. Where does the office of the presidential adviser on cocoa fix in the organogram of COCOBOD?
A. My Lord I don’t know
Q. I am suggesting to you that the position of presidential adviser on cocoa doesn’t exist in the organogram of COCOBOD?
A. My Lord, the letter I received stated the president’s representative. I don’t know.
Q. Please tell this court whether the president’s representative on cocoa exists in the organogram of COCOBOD?
A. My Lord I don’t know
Q. Again I’m suggesting to you that that position does not exist in the organogram of COCOBOD?
A. My lord, I indicated that I don’t have any idea.
Q. And further, the presidential adviser or representative on cocoa is a political creation that only came into being in January 2017 out of the transitional team. That is correct?
A. Thank you for the information my Lord. My Lord, I don’t know.
Q. But know as a fact that the position either as adviser or representative did not exist before January 2017 that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Tell the court if you know. The presidential adviser and or representative on cocoa, PW3, Dr. Adu Ampomah, and Dr. F.M Amoah were all on transitional team on cocoa. Is that correct?
A. My Lord I don’t know.
Q. And that was the origin of all the investigations of Lithovit at the transitional committee. Do you know?
A. My Lord I don’t have any idea.
Q. I’m suggesting to you that the investigation into lithovit started at the transitional team on cocoa?
A. My Lord I’m hearing it for the first time.
Q. Page 134 of Exhibit 130, it is true that you were very clear that a number of fertilizers (11) fungicides and insecticides (18) were undergoing testing before your assumption of office as the Executive Director?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Is it also true that since the 5th of September, CRIG received 32 fertilizers formulation samples for evaluation, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. CRIG also received 28 and 32 fungicides and insecticides formulation respectively for testing?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Now, from January 2017, when you handed over as Executive Director of CRIG till today, how many of those fertilizers, the 11 and 32 making it 43, had been investigated?
A. My Lord I don’t know.
Q. Now apart from lithovit, have you heard of any other being investigated?
A. My Lord, I have not heard anything about any fertilizer or chemical being investigated.
Q. Again have you heard of any of the 20 fungicides and 28 … being investigated after the January 2017?
A. My Lord I don’t know of any investigations ongoing.
Q. Kindly tell this honourable court, what about the insecticides, do you know of any investigations going on with respect of that?
A. My Lord I don’t know.
Q. I’m suggesting to you that there are no investigations going on in respect of the fertilizers, fungicides and insecticides that were submitted to CRIG before your coming to office, and those submitted after you coming to office?
A. I don’t have any idea.
Q. Sir, please go to Exhibit 13 of page…you said CRIG has for 79 years built the reputation as a World class Centre of excellence in cocoa research, is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q: Do you still stand by that?
A. That is correct and I stand by that because that continues to be the mission and vision of CRIG.
Q. And you said CRIG has facilitated and fostered very strong linkages and collaborations with world renowned organizations, agencies, universities and major stakeholders in the world’s cocoa industry, you said so?
A. My lord, that is correct.
Q. And you still stand by that?
A. My Lord I still stand by the statement.
Q. Now let me put you on the spot, so what would you say to the recommendation by the Adu Ampomah committee for the inclusion of scientists in the universities in the research of CRIG. Is it meant to be an indictment on CRIG?
A. My Lord, I don’t have a full recollection of the statement made by Adu Ampomah.
Q. Page 8 of the report of the ad-hoc investigations/disciplinary committee that investigated alleged malpractices of the testing of agro chemicals (Exhibit H). Would you consider the recommendations F of Exhibit H an indictment on CRIG?
A. My Lord, the statement here has the potential to undermine the hard won reputation of CRIG as a center of excellence for developing technologies that enables all stakeholders to achieve the objectives of the Ghana cocoa industry. Undermining the credibility of the scientists who carried out chemical and machines testing at CRIG, this is an indictment that goes a long way to damage CRIG
Q. So, I’m right to say that you do not agree with that recommendation?
A. My Lord, certainly I’m not in agreement with the recommendation
Q. Sir, you also stated that in Exhibit 130, on page 23, through the effort of CRIG and with the massive support of COCOBOD, the quality of Ghana’s cocoa beans continued to be the benchmark against, which the quality of beans from other origins were assessed. You stated that?
A. My Lord, I did.
Q. Do you still stand by that?
A. My Lord, I still stand by that but as of today, I don’t know what is happening at the international market.
Q. As at January 2017, that statement of the Ghana’s cocoa beans being the benchmark the … is it true?
A. My Lord that is very true.
Q. It is true that 3 years of supply of lithovit did not negatively impact our cocoa beans to change that position, is that correct?
A. My Lord, in so far as there has not been any adverse report from the international market on the quality of Ghana’s cocoa except for a time when there was a report of herbicides contamination (24D name of herbicide).
Q. For the avoidance of doubt, herbicide 24D is not from lithovit?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. The herbicide 24D is also not from the third defendant Agricult?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. You left CRIG in January 2017, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Lithovit was supplied as a fertilizer to COCOBOD between 2014 and 2016, is that correct?
A. My Lord, I don’t know that.
Q. In 2017, you were also at CHED?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Between 2014 and 2017, did anything change that would render Ghana’s cocoa bean …that would be the benchmark on which cocoa beans are assessed on the international market?
A. My Lord, to the best of my knowledge nothing of that sort happened.
Q. So if lithovit was supplied between 2014 and 2016, then I’m right to say it did not adversely affect your assessment you made of Ghana cocoa beans
A. My Lord that is correct and within the period being referred to cocoa production in Ghana is experienced a great output.
Q. Sir, you said cocoa production during the period, and the period being referred to is the period 2014 to 2016.
A. My Lord, I think in 2016 we have over 900,000 metric tons
Q. Sir, indeed 2016 gave Ghana Cocoa Board one of the highest yields in its history, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. So if anybody tells this honourable court that Ghana’s cocoa yields went down because of lithovit, that cannot be true?
A. My Lord, I don’t think that can be true.
Q. Exhibit 129. Please look at page 2 of Exhibit 129. In 2016, CRIG had 35 Research Scientists, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. And indeed, your table 1 detailed the number of Research Scientists that have worked at CRIG from 2009 to 2016, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. In fact, as at 2009, you had as many as 44 Research Scientists?
A. My Lord that is true.
Q. And it is also true that throughout the years, page 5, one of the major researched areas was to address the low productivity resulting mainly from low yielding and aged cocoa tree stocks, pests and diseases and decline in soil fertility on farmers’ farms, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And you see a fertilizer that can improve the yields of mature cocoa, would be welcomed in a situation of this kind of problems?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. So if officials of CHED find that Lithovit improves the yields of matured cocoa that would be in line with the problem complained of?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Did it ever come to your attention while you were the Executive Director that officials of CHED found as a fact that Lithovit was applied to, improved the flowering and yields of matured cocoa trees that it was applied on?
A. That was not brought to my attention but CRIG’s own assessment that enables us to renew certificates indicated that Lithovit met the requirements of the CTCM and therefore, recommended that the certificate of the product be renewed.
Q. Now, it is true that cutting the low productivity in the cocoa industry is always on the front burner of every COCOBOD and CRIG administrations?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Please turn to page 23 of Exhibit 129, look at number 9, So Abapa was submitted in 2013 and the test was completed in 2015, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Go to number 11 of Exhibit 129, Bi Grow liquid fertilizer was received in 2012 and recommended in 2013 that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Cocoa Sett was received in 2013 and the test was completed in 2013.
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Now, number 10, lithovit was received in 2013 and the test completed in 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. The common denominator of all the four number 9, 10, 11, & 12, they were tested between a year and two years?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And of all of them the only one investigated and complained of them is lithovit, is that also correct?
A. So far as I know, that is correct.
Q. Go to the next page, page 34 of Exhibit 129, the number 17 Acarp Compost for raising cocoa seedlings that was submitted in 2015 and recommended in the same year 2015, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Fertegre Cacao super was submitted in 2012 and the test completed in 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. Number One was submitted in 2013 and completed in 2015, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. The same apply to Cocoa Wura and Green OK, they were submitted in 2013 and test completed in 2015?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Therefore, any assertion that if a fertilizer is not tested for three years and used on cocoa would be wrong cannot be true.
A. My Lord, that assertion cannot be right.
Q. Any assertion that supplying fertilizer that was not tested for three years for use on cocoa would be fraudulent can also not be true?
A. My Lord, as I explained at the last meeting, the scientists have procedures for testing fertilizers and for some fertilizers. They find it appropriate to terminate the trial at a certain point and the draw conclusion on these fertilizers. The recommendations they make on these fertilizers indicate that they can be used profitably for cocoa production, and therefore, my answer to the question is yes.
Q. The protocol that the scientists developed for testing fertilizers as you told this court, they also developed appropriate protocol for testing of fungicides and insecticides, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And from page 36 of Exhibit 129, you have listed the insecticides that were submitted for testing at CRIG between 2009 and 2016, is that true?
A. My Lord, that is true.
Q. And you also listed the active ingredients of the insecticides?
A. My Lord that is true
Q. It is true that, it is the efficacy of the active ingredients that’s important and not the length of the testing period, is that correct?
A. My Lord, depending on the type of active ingredients and molecules that is correct. Some molecules are novel, new, this has never been used in the system and therefore, it has to be tested over several seasons, otherwise the molecules that we know, they have standard and have tested them again, the testing period can be shortened.
Q. Does CRIG conduct all of the laboratory tests of fungicides and insecticides in their laboratory at CRIG, Tafo?
A. My Lord, for testing of residues of cocoa beans this is done outside of the country, for some other molecules, we seek the assistance of the Ghana Standard Authority.
Q. It is true that CRIG takes all the necessary professional steps to ensure that the integrity of its test, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Exhibit H, open page 8, in recommendation E, the committee stated: “The system of testing at CRIG should be reviewed to make it more stringent and independent of the individual scientists who conduct the testing.” In view of all the answers you have given today, would consider this an indictment on CRIG
A. My Lord I don’t understand this part of statement, that scientists should be make independent of the individual testing…
Q. If that statement were to mean that the scientists were not objective in their test would you agree to it?
A. My Lord, we have had cause to discipline some scientists who deviate from what I would be considered the norm. So I would not agree with this statement. We have our own internal mechanisms that ensure that the right things are done.
Q. Would you agree to that recommendation?
A. My Lord, once again, we mentioned in this particular courtroom, something that was done at CRIG in December 2016, a minute we read from that meeting that Dr. Oddoye is to be the chairman of the CTCM, the minutes prepared by Ms Fatima Musah, those minutes clearly shows that we have our own review from time to time.
As an institution we are capable of reviewing our own work, and we would always welcome suggestions and recommendations but certainly would not agree with what is suggested in recommendation
