The Adu Ampoma led Committee that probed the supply of lithovit fertilizer at COCOBOD has been accused of failing to invite Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni, Siedu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited, before establishing facts of wrongdoing against them.
Dr Opuni is a former Chief Executive of Ghana Cocoa Board, while Siedu Agongo owns Agricult Ghana Ltd., the supplier of the agrochemical in question.
The four-member committee, which had only Dr Yaw Adu Ampoma as Scientist, according to the defendants, did not give them opportunity for fair hearing.
Dr Gilbert Anim Kwapong, a former Executive Director of CRIG, testifying before the Accra High Court, last week, made the observation that the three, who have been accused of purchasing and supplying a “drinkable lithovit fertiliser”, were not part of the list of individuals invited by the committee.
Presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh, the court heard that the committee also failed to indicate in its findings that the state investigative agencies were already looking into the matter and rather went ahead to recommend the abrogation of Agricult’s contract.
Dr Kwapong was testifying as Dr Opuni’s 8th Defence Witness (DW8) and was being cross-examined by Benson Nutsuikpi, Counsel for businessman Agongo and Agricult Ghana Ltd.
The court was further told that the witness gave a statement to the Police Criminal Investigation Department (CID) at the instance of Dr Ampoma, Complainant and Principal Witness in the GH¢2.1billion financial loss case to the state trial.
The witness further stated that he gave his statement to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), way before the Adu Ampoma committee was constituted.
He also said the lithovit fertilizer that was supplied to CRIG through COCOBOD was liquid.
According to him, CRIG never had an issue about the fact that the Lithovit was liquid fertiliser.
Since Dr Adu Ampoma was the only Scientist on the committee, the witness said he asked most of the questions, including the suggestion that lithovit was a powder, but the latter vehemently disagreed.
He said, while he was at CRIG, not once did he receive a complaint about the efficacy of lithovit from Scientists, staff, farmer or farmers’ agents.
On the issue of lithovit tasting like water and that some farmers drank it on their farms, he said it was brought to his attention by one Dr William Mensah, an Executive Director, in charge of Finance and Administration at COCOBOD.
DW8 further stated that the protocol developed for testing agrochemicals and spraying machines are not static, and that scientific conclusions could be subjective.
The following is the cross-examination;
Q. Sir, you have Exhibit H with you, please turn to page 3, the executive summary. Have you seen it, the date of the letter constituting the four member committee is the 4th October, 2017?
A. That’s correct.
Q. The membership of that committee listed on page 4 are Dr Adu Ampomah and three other persons who are all of legal background. That’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And from the sitting, number 6 page 5, this committee sat on the 9th,12th and 20th of October 2017. That’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Your very first statement that you gave to the Financial Forensic Unit (FFU), was on the 15th of March 2017?
A. My Lord, I need to see the document I’m not too sure?
Q. You appeared before this committee that is correct.
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Please tell this court, which was earlier, your meeting with FFU or appearing before the Adu-Ampomah committee, which was first?
A. My Lord, I need to see the documents to be sure, it has been a while.
Q. Please see Exhibit 27 that is the statement you gave to EOCO?
A. That is correct.
Q. And you gave that statement on the 25th of March, 2017?
A. Yes my Lord that is correct.
Q. And this was way before you appeared before the Adu-Ampomah committee in the October 2017?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Sir, look at page 5, on the same page, just before the committee sitting, paragraph list out all the persons that the committee spoke to. That’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. In fact, from the places listed under section in that paragraph 5 were all with COCOBOD that’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And you see, page 7, has a heading Lithovit (Agricult Ghana ltd) of their findings and recommendations. That’s there?
A. yes my Lord
Q. Go to paragraph F, that committee stated that “to use Lithovit on matured cocoa tree is without scientific basis,” is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. Now, kindly tell this honourable court, throughout your stay at CRIG as the acting and subsequent head of CRIG, did the CTCM or any of your scientific bodies made any finding like that statement?
A. My Lord I don’t remember any such finding or statement.
Q. If the CTCM or any of your scientific bodies had reached that conclusion on lithovit, they would have brought it to your attention. That’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And I can state throughout your tenure as acting and subsequently confirmed head (Executive Director) of CRIG no such finding was brought to your attention?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Just for the purpose of emphasis, did you tell this honourable court that when you were first invited by EOCO, it was by Adu Ampomah?
A. My Lord I don’t think so.
Q. But the meeting was in the conference room near his office?
A. EOCO meeting was at the Head Office of EOCO.
Q. So it was the CID meeting that was in COCOBOD head office
A. Yes my Lord.
Q. And that was at the instance of Adu Ampomah?
A. Yes my Lord.
Q. Do you also know that Dr. Adu Ampomah is said to be the Complainant in this case?
A. My Lord I don’t know about that.
Q. That committee, their finding on the same page 7, came to the conclusion that from “the certificate issue to lithovit was not for liquid fertilizer”, have you seen that?
A. Yes my Lord I have seen it
Q. Sir, again, throughout your tenure as the acting head and subsequent head of CRIG, there was never an issue about the fact that Lithovit that CRIG was dealing with was liquid, that is a fact?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. And also the Lithovit you came to meet as the head, which has always been supplied to farmers and continued while you were there was liquid fertilizer?
A. My Lord, all the information that were supplied to me on the product indicated that the product was liquid
Q. Sir, indeed the Lithovit on which there was the joint training with CHED for which you wrote exhibit 126, on 21st October 2014, was liquid fertilizer, that is true.
A. My Lord that is true
Q. And again at CRIG when you were there, was never any issue about lithovit not being tested, there was nothing like that?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. But again look at the finding B on page 7, it says that Lithovit liquid fertilizer was not tested by CRIG on cocoa.
A. My Lord the statement is there…?
Q. And from your previous answer it was not brought to your attention at all about lithovit fertilizer not being tested?
A. Yes my Lord it was never brought to my attention.
Q. Now, in their recommendations on page 8, (A) they recommended that “the contract for lithovit liquid fertilizer should be abrogated”, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And further B that “the certificate for lithovit liquid fertilizer should be withdrawn?
A. My Lord that is in the document.
Q. Go back to page 5 on paragraph, is it a fact on paragraph 5 that A2 and A3, were not made to appear before the committee, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. You would agree with me that the recommendations of that committee is very far reaching?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Indeed, A1 Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni is also not listed in paragraph 5 of page 5 as one of the persons they spoke to that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Yet paragraph D on page 8, was emphatic that A1 and A2 and A3 be reported to the state investigative bodies for investigation etc, that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. From Exhibit 127, that is your statement to EOCO, before this committee was constituted, before it sat and took evidence from employees of COCOBOD, the state investigative agencies had already been brought into the matter. That’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Sir, but you see that it was not disclosed in the findings that the state agencies were already into the matter.
A. My Lord that was correct.
Q. Now, Sir, let’s look at recommendation E on page 8, that it’s stated that the system of testing at CRIG should be reviewed to make more stringent and independent of individual scientist who conduct the testing, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And that is purely an internal matter for COCOBOD and CRIG that is true?
A. My Lord, that is true per the system that operates at COCOBOD.
Q. Per recommendations M, the CTCM must be overhauled by bringing in randomly selected Scientists from academia, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Now, again that finding has to do with situations within CRIG and how the CTCM functions?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. So from the summary of the report, which we have gone through today, it is very clear that the persons, being accused in this matter, were the persons not heard?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Please turn to Exhibit H, pages 42, 43 and 44, paragraph 13. That is supposed to be your evidence that was taken by the committee. That’s correct.
A. My Lord, according to the document paragraph 13 was my evidence.
Q. As if it was a question and answer session?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Please kindly tell this court who was asking these questions?
A. My Lord, I can’t remember clearly, but I think the chairman was asking most of the questions.
Q. And this chairman is Dr. Adu Ampomah that’s correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. Go to page 44, you were asked “here is the situation when the sample sent to CRIG was powder, but the subsequent supply to COCOBOD were all liquid, won’t the scientists be curious. And you said interesting, the first time I saw lithovit it was in liquid form. That certainly took place, that is true.
A. My Lord that is true.
Q. And it is true that when you were asked where did you see it, you responded, “in fact I saw it on the market, and as I said the scientists will search for funds to go out to do their evaluation and we trusted that they will do a good job” it is true isn’t it?
A. My Lord it is true.
Q. That answer is what you told EOCO, CID and everywhere that you have been questioned on this matter, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And Exhibit H, which was a report on the investigation never come to your attention for your comment throughout your stay at CRIG and CODAPEC/ HiTECH?
A. My Lord, at the time of preparing this report, I had left CRIG but it was never brought to my attention.
Q. Look at Exhibit 18, the committee made adverse findings with regards to cocoa nti, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. Now what is the date of that report?
A. My Lord the report is dated 6th November, 2016?
Q. Now to your knowledge has cocoa nti been retested?
A. My Lord, I have no idea.
Q. Do you know one Fatima Musah?
A. My Lord, I know Fatima Musah.
Q. Who is she?
A. My Lord, she was once at CRIG at the HR (Human Resource) Department.
Q. On the 20th of December, 2016, did you have a meeting with some members of the CTCM at the EJA Asomaning Event Center conference room. Did that take place?
A. My Lord that meeting took place at the event conference room.
Q. You were there as the Executive Director and chairman, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Dr. Richard Adu Acheampong, member of the CTCM was present?
A. My Lord I think so.
Q. Mr Andrews Y. Akrofi, member of the CTCM was present?
A. My Lord I think so.
Q. Dr. Alfred Arthur, a member of the CTCM was also present?
A. My Lord I think so.
Q. Sir it is true that two members, Dr. George Ekumfi Ameyaw and Mr. Francis Anyane…were on leave and study leave, is that correct?
A. My Lord Mr. Anyane…was on leave but I am not sure of the other person.
Q. Ms Fatima Musah served as the recorder for the meeting, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And by a forwarding letter by the 12th of January 2017, she sent the minutes of the said meeting. That’s true, you’re familiar with that forwarding letter?
A. That is true my Lord, I’m familiar with that forwarding letter.
Benson. We want to tender it through the witness.
Prosecution no objection
Court: it is admitted into evidence as Exhibit 128.
Q. Sir, you called that meeting as per paragraph 3 of that meeting at the instance of Deputy Chief Executive A&QC following some concerns raised on cocoa nti fertilizer report, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. And you also indicated in paragraph 4, that the purpose was to reconstitute CTCM, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And Rev. Fr Dr. Oddoye was going to be the new chairman, paragraph 4, the last line?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. In Paragraph 5, you indicated the composition of the institute to the growth of cocoa production and CODAPEC programme, which has helped in cocoa yield over the years … is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. This was because of some adverse media publication about the institute. that’s true?
A. My Lord, indeed there were some adverse media reports about the institute.
Q. By the way what is CODAPEC
A. My Lord, CODAPEC is the acronym for Cocoa Diseases and Pest Control?
Q. And under CODAPEC, COCOBOD supply and train farmers on the use of pesticides, fungicides etc?
A. My Lord that is also true.
Q. And CODAPEC’s twin project is HITECH.
A. My Lord that is also true, the HITECH does the provision of fertilizers?
Q. Indeed, the criticisms you referred to at the meeting was about the people saying there was decline in Ghana cocoa by the use of insecticides in mass spraying. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lord that is correct, in addition to the investigation of University of Cape Coast report and others
Q. Sir, it was agreed that the procedure for submitting product to the institute had not been well coordinated and there was, therefore, the need to streamline that procedure, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And you came out of that meeting with a list of recommendations on the way forward?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Indeed, the first recommendation was that COCOBOD was to continue to take delivery of products on behalf of CRIG. Is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And by product, when you chaired, that meeting was product sample for testing?
A. My Lord that is correct. And the products are the agrochemicals and spraying machines that are tested by CRIG.
Q. Now, there were 9 recommendations made at that meeting?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. But you see, cocoa nti certificate was not withdrawn.
A. My Lord I have no idea about that?
Q. From the findings it is clear that sometimes issues arrive at CRIG in relation to testing some agrochemicals tested?
A. My Lord, from time to time things like this happen.
Q. So Sir, the issue of some scientists following the procedures that another may not necessarily agree with have always been raised with regards to testing of agrochemicals and machines at CRIG?
A. My Lord that might not be correct, per the terms of reference of the CTCM, the committee would at all times have to agree to the protocol procedures for testing and the sites for testing before and test is carry out. So any chances of disagreement would be really negligible
Q. It is one school of thought among your scientists that after laboratory tests show that the chemical components are the same as a product tested by CRIG, the protocol of testing can be different?
A. My Lord that school of thought has never come to my attention, but one thing I know as a scientist is that scientists do make a lot of inferences and also extrapolation in drawing conclusions.
Q. Certainly, if from the established literature and laboratory testing, a scientist needs to draw some conclusions and make some assumptions as they will?
A. My Lord, that is correct and I must add, virtually all models are based on assumptions.
Q. Sir look at Exhibit 18 page 6, the committee made a recommendation, number 5, was that the report of cocoa nti be withdrawn, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And such was that going forward, recommendation 6, all the scientists who took part in the testing should sign the report. That’s correct?
A. My Lord, that is not just limited to cocoa nti.
Q. And it is true that the committee found as a fact, the samples of cocoa nti, which was claimed to have been brought 3 years earlier was not brought at that time, is that correct?
A. My Lord per the findings of the committee, that is correct.
Thursday’s Cross-examination
Q. Two papers you signed every page of them?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. …74…the document you have is your handing over notes of the Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG), Tafo, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. How many pages are they?
A. My Lord, the handing over notes is about 38 pages.
Q. And you signed each and every page of it, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. And you prepared it with all the other departments’ heads at CRIG, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Can you remember around what time you prepared it?
A. My Lord, I think it was around late January early February 2017.
Q . And who did you give the original copy to?
A. My Lord, I was directed to give it to the Honourable Minister for Agriculture and the representative of the president at COCOBOD.
Benson: My Lord I want to tender the document through him.
Anthony Gyembibi: My Lord no objection.
Court: document tendered in evidence and marked as Exhibit 129
Q. Now the other document you have, what is the title of that document?
A. Testing of agrochemicals and spraying machines for use on cocoa farms in Ghana.
Q. Again you prepared that document?
A. My Lord, I did.
Q. Did you do it alone?
A. That’s correct, my Lord, but I obtained some relevant information from some scientists at CRIG.
Q. How many pages?
A. My Lord, it is 14 pages?
Q. And you signed every page of that report?
A. My Lord I did.
Q. Look at the last page, 14, it’s indicated “reported by”, then your signature and your name Dr. Gilbert Anim Kwapong, that’s correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Why the “reported by”, What does the reported by signifies?
A. My Lord “report by” here is simply to indicate that Dr. Gilbert Anim Kwapong is the author of this document.
Benson: My Lord, we wish to tender this report through him.
Gyembibi: my Lord no objection
Codjoe: we don’t have any objection
Court: document adopted as Exhibit 130
Q. Let’s start with Exhibit 130, can you recall when you prepared it?
A. My Lord, the report was prepared in January 2017.
Q. Your first statement to EOCO was 15th of March 2017, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. So these two documents Exhibits 129 and 230 were both prepared before your invitation to any of the investigative bodies and committees, is that also correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Would I be right to say that these two Exhibits, 129 and 130, were prepared in the normal and ordinary cause of your work well before your attention was drawn to any issue regarding the matters of which you gave statements to the investigative authorities or committees?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Let’s take the paper on testing. You stated in paragraph 2 that at the time of your appointment as the Executive Director of CRIG, you had never had any encounter with A1 neither did he know you?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Now it is true that attached to your paper on Exhibit 130, you listed our all the insecticides that were undergoing evaluation prior to 15th September 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. You also attached a list of fertilizers undergoing evaluation prior to September 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct, but my document here has a missing page, page 7.
(It was found in prosecution’s own copy so a photocopy was done for the other parties)
Q. Sir so in fact the page 7 is your list of fungicides undergoing evaluation prior to September 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Now please go to page 6, the fertilizer “Number One” which serial number is S4, was received by CRIG in 2013 and the test completed on the 23rd of May 2015, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. The next one, the fertilizer “Cocoa Wura” was received by CRIG in 2013 and the test completed on 13th May 2015, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Adom Cocoa Fertilizer was received in 2013 and the test was completed on the 25th of October 2015?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. Adehye Cocoa fertilizer, was received in 2013 and test completed on the 5th October 2015, that is correct?
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Now Sir, it is true that in terms of calendar years what these four products have in common is that they were tested for two years, that is true?
A. For the information listed in table 1(a) of Exhibit 130, page 6, that is correct.
Q. Now for the time you stayed at CRIG, were there any complaints about these four fertilizers, Number One, namely cocoa Wura, Adom fertilizer and Adehye fertilizer?
A. My Lord, I received no complaint neither did I hear any complaint.
Q. Sir, from table 1 (a) clearly there is no rule of thumb that existed at CRIG prior to your appointment that all fertilizers fungicides, or spraying machines should be tested for three years?
A. My Lord I want to refer this court to page 2 of exhibit 130 2nd paragraph on testing of chemicals and spraying machines. My Lord, I want to read that section, effectively and efficiently execute this mandate CRIG has in place… scientists in each of the above…
Q. So with this, so the protocol developed for testing of fertilizers, agrochemicals and spraying machines are not static to the extent that it decrees that all fertilizers should be tested for three years, is that correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct and I would explain. If you look at fertilizer Number 1, Cocoa Wura, Adom fertilizer and Adehye fertilizer. Now let’s come to the next column, that is the active ingredients, if you look at the active ingredients, they share active ingredients albeit in different proportion particularly the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (NP and K) same goes for sulphur (S), Iron (Fe), Zinc (Zn), magnesium (Mn), copper (Cu), boron (B), and Molybdenum (Mo).
I want to indicate that all products are tested against standards. These standards have gone through thorough testing and have come out as the best so scientists use this standard as benchmark to test other products.
More or less these products we have here, are more or less generics of the standard products and they are expected to behave the same as the benchmark product. Scientists will go through two stages of testing fertilizers.
The first stage is at the laboratory to test for the presence of these active ingredients and also the solubility because the product needs to be soluble, and then we also test for the uptick. These are all carried out in the laboratory.
And the other part is in the field. So once they collect the data and compare with the standard, they terminate the trial there, because they can draw inference and extrapolation to conclude on the experiment. So with this, duration of trials are not always static.
Q. Sir, look at table 1(a) Elite organic fertilizer, was received in 2010 and completed testing in October 2014, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. The fertilizer, Green OK was received in 2011 and the test completed on the 20th October, 2015, is that also correct?
A. My Lord, that is correct.
Q. The trials for these two took four calendar years.
A. My Lord that is correct.
Q. So, again, sometimes testing of fertilizers can last more than three years, is that correct?
A. My Lord that is correct.
The case is adjourned to 18th December
