Dr. Gilbert Anim Kwapong, a former Executive Director of Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG) has denied a statement allegedly attributed to him by the Yaw Adu Ampomah Committee.
According to him, the committee, which investigated the alleged malpractices in the testing of agro-chemicals at CRIG, had in its report a statement that he did not make.
While he agreed to have testified before the committee that the first sample of Lithovit that he saw personally was liquid, never did he add that “I didn’t have any idea that in the past it was powder. It was recently that I got to know it was powder.”
Being led in evidence by Samuel Codjoe, Counsel for former Chief Executive for Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni, the former CRIG Executive Director denied before the Accra High Court of ever making that statement in the latter part of the above paragraph.
He told the trial court, presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh yesterday that: “I have not seen this document (Exhibit) before. This is indeed what I told the committee, that the first time I saw it (lithovit) it was in a bottle. But this statement, which continued to say that I got to know it was powder, I don’t believe I said it. The first time I saw the sample, it was in a bottle and it was liquid. This sentence attributed to me cannot be right.”
Dr. Kwapong is testifying before the court as the 8th Defence Witness (PW8) of Dr. Opuni, who is standing trial, together with businessman Seidu Agongo and his company, Africult Ghana Limited, for allegedly causing financial loss of GH¢271.3 million to the state, in the distribution of ‘substandard fertiliser’ to cocoa farmers.
Dr Yaw Adu Ampomah, prosecution third witness (PW3), chaired four-member cocoa transition committee in 2017 and was the special advisor to the Minister for Agriculture on Cocoa Affairs, as well as a member of National Development Planning Committee.
Dr. Adu-Ampomah was a Deputy Chief Executive at COCOBOD from 2009 and finally retired in 2013, and was called back to COCOBOD in 2017 as Deputy Chief Executive, before moving on to the Agric Ministry in October 2018, as the adviser to the sector minister on cocoa affairs.
Mr Codjoe had already in 2019 challenged the capacity of Dr Adu Ampomah’s committee for lacking expertise in the field of fertiliser testing to analyse a scientific report by CRIG on Lithovit, the fertiliser for which the parties are in court.
Hitherto, DW8 told the court that he is not a soil scientist nor fertiliser expert, but signed agro-chemicals certificate based on information provided by a Committee for Testing Chemicals and Machinery (CTCM) .
He said the CTCM is responsible for producing field report and this contains information on field service that they had carried on all agro-chemicals and machines used in the previous year that certificates have been issued and the chemical have actively been used in the field.
The witness further explained that the CTCM duty was to collect information on the efficacy of products, farmers’ reactions and comments on the products that they have used.
Similarly, the committee also pick sample of products from the market and from other sources for testing at CRIG and they also check that the labels on the product conform to the information that was originally provided by the scientists.
The information collected is compiled into an annual report of Cocoa Pest and Disease Control (CODAPEC) and with that report the witness was able to know chemicals that have passed the committee’s test in the field, and when they are submitting the renewal certificate they attached the expired certificate.
The following are excerpts of yesterday’s proceedings;
Mr. Codjoe: Before we proceed, I will want to bring to your notice the fact that we know of the opinion that the Registrar is deliberately and wilfully disrespecting us… I spoke to him yesterday in the afternoon and he promised to get us the records, so I sent our clerk, one Benard Aryee, to the Registry to go for it. When he went he was informed that another clerk…by name Jerry Arthur, had come and they had given him the record.
Indeed, the clerk was from…The records he brought are less than five percent of the proceedings. It only consists of further evidence in chief of PW3 of Adu Ampomah….
It is our submission that this is a deliberate deploy by the Registrar to frustrate us.
The Registrar is aware that the records consist of more than 15 times with what he gave us, because he is the one who was in charge of preparing the records of appeal.
We will want the Registrar to be invited to this court to come and explain why he is doing that to us. Our position is that orders of the court are to be obeyed.
We are filing a motion today or the deliberate and wilful refusal to comply with the order of the court, which is making it impossible to conduct our defence. We require the records to enable us to consider our examination.
Court: You have made your submission about the Registrar, the court would take a position after proceedings.
Q. Dr Anim Kwapong, at the last adjourned date you talked about chemicals applied to cocoa and you mentioned insecticides, fertilizers and fungicides. Do you remember?
A. Yes. I do remember
Q. Can you tell the court the types of fertilisers which are applied to cocoa?
A. My Lord, we have granular fertilizers that are solid and liquid fertilisers.
Q. Can you tell the court how a particular fertilizer would be introduced to COCOBOD?
A. The company, wishing to introduce a fertiliser to be used on cocoa farms would have to apply to the office of the Deputy Chief Executive in charge of Agronomy and Quality Control.
Q. Does anything happen after the application?
A. My Deputy Chief Executive of Agronomy will inform CRIG about the application and directs that CRIG picks samples for testing.
Q. Can you tell us the process of testing?
A. Once the letter is received and the chemical is picked up, there is a committee at CRIG, the name of this committee, the Committee for Testing Chemicals and Machines (CTCM). The committee identifies the appropriate division at CRIG for testing the chemical. They determine the modalities or methodologies for testing the chemical. They also determine the site – areas of chemicals would be tested. They also work together to determine the cost of the testing.
My Lord, there are several more that they do and my lord, I provided details of the terms of reference for CTCM in the report I presented to EOCO. My Lord, it is my wish that if this document can be made available, you can see all things that I’m making reference to. In short, the CTCM oversees and coordinate all activities related to the testing of the agrochemicals and machines at CRIG.
Q. Do you know about the fertiliser called lithovit?
A. Yes I do.
Q. How did you know about lithovit?
A. My Lord, I initially knew about lithovit because it was mentioned to me at CRIG.
Q. If you say you initially knew about lithovit because it was mentioned to you at CRIG, did you also subsequent know about lithovit?
A. The second instance was when it was brought to my attention again at an investigative committee meeting.
Q. When was lithovit introduced to COCOBOD?
A. My Lord, I don’t know.
Q. Was it before or after you were appointed Executive Director?
Prosecution: Objection. This question is a leading question. The question has been answered about when lithovit was introduced to COCOBOD and the witness answered he doesn’t know. Any question seeking to suggest…The witness should be allowed to answer open ended question
Counsel: The objection is misconceived. The witness has stated that he knows about lithovit. This question is relevant.
(Codjoe abandons question)
Q. When you were the Executive Director of CRIG, can you mention the names and types of the fertilisers and specifically foliar fertilisers?
A. During my tenure we had over 90 agro-chemicals that were being tested and I cannot recall their names and types
Q. But you remember when you appear before the committee they asked you about fertilizer that was used during your time as the Executive Director. Isn’t it?
A. My lord, I don’t recall any such thing.
Q. Can I get Exhibit H?
A. Have a look at page 42, paragraph 31.0 of Exhibit H. In it you have the evidence of Dr Anim Kwapong and it extends from 42 to 45. Is that not so?
A. That is true.
Q. Do you recollect that you were specifically asked questions on the testing of the lithovit by the committee, chaired by Dr. Adu Ampomah?
A. Per what is before me, I confirmed that I did mention that.
Q. And in fact, what you told the committee was the truth?
A. I always stand by what I said. It is the truth.
Q. You were speaking the truth when you informed the committee that “the first sample of lithovit that I saw personally was liquid and I didn’t have any idea that in the past it was Powder. It was recently that I got to know it was powder.” It was the truth not so?
A. I have not seen this document before. This is, indeed, what I told the committee the first time I saw it, it was in a bottle. But this statement, which continued to say that I got to know it was powder, I don’t believe I said it. The first time I saw the sample it was in a bottle and it was liquid. This sentence attributed to me cannot be right.
Q. So now, until today, you have not seen a copy of the committee’s report?
A. No.
Q. So are you saying you were not given a copy of the report?
A. I was not given a copy.
Q. Before the committee, you informed the panel that you were not directly in charge of testing. Do you stand by it?
A. Yes I stand by it. I’m not responsible for testing.
Q. If you say we’re not responsible for the testing, who was responsible for the testing and how was it done?
A. I have mentioned that when I assumed office at CRIG, there was already in existence a committee in place that have oversight responsibility and also coordinates the testing of agrochemicals and machines. They collate all the results and recommendations and once they are satisfied with what they have collated, they bring a report of all they have tested to a desk and to sign. I also did go through it to exercise due diligence before appending my signature to the document, report presented for my signature.
Q. You have before you Exhibits 4 and 4(a). These are renewal certificates for lithovit Foliar fertiliser. Who signed the certificates for the renewals?
A. My Lord, I signed both certificates. But the first certificate I signed in 2015, it is not for renewal and per the records that I checked there was no indication that the first certificate I signed in 2015 was for renewal. I signed the second one in 2016 as a renewal.
Q. What is the name of the fertiliser and what type of fertiliser is lithovit?
A. My Lord, I must indicate that I’m not a soil scientist or expert in fertilisers. And I have indicated that the bottle that was presented to me is bottle containing a liquid. So I continue to use the brand name instead of the chemical.
Q. On page 44 of Exhibit H, you were asked what was the basis of the renewal of lithovit certificate, can you tell us what was your basis?
A. Companies per our rules will make a formal request for a certificate renewal. The CTCM will ensure that the requisite payments have been made. They had provided me with a field report. This field report contains information on field service they had carried on all agro-chemical and machines used in the previous year, where certificates have been issued and the chemical have actively been used in the field.
So the committee collect information on the efficacy of the product, farmers’ reaction and comments on the products that they have used, they also pick sample of the product from the market and from other sources for testing at CRIG.
They also check that the labels on the product to conform to the information that was originally provided by the scientists. We write annual report of CODAPEC…with that report I’m able to know chemicals that have passed the test in the field and when they are submitting the renewal certificate, they attached the expired certificate. So with this information available to me I’m able to sign the certificate. I do that for all certificates that I signed.
So in signing the second certificate, the first certificate was attached to the one that I signed in 2016, and there is no adverse or report mentioned in the CODAPEC evaluation report. So I went ahead and signed it.
Q. In your time as Executive Director of CRIG, did you meet A1 who was Chief Executive of COCOBOD?
A. Yes, as the Executive Director I met my boss.
Q. Can you remember the number of occasions?
A. We meet several times at meetings at the board room, but I cannot remember the number of times we held meetings at the board room. I also met him at a forum at one of his sub-stations at Acherensua and Maaban. He was in for a visit to the sub-station and I had to be there to receive him as the Executive Director.
He also was at CRIG when we organised the Cocoa farmers’ day celebration in 2016. I welcomed him into CRIG that day. That is as far as I can remember.
Q. Can you tell us the nature of discussions concerning your work if any, that you had with Chief Executive, that is A1, during your period when you were the Executive Director of CRIG?
A. There were two occasions that I had personal discussions with him concerning my work when he visited. It was the usual welcome. With the meetings in the boardroom it was general discussion about the agenda.
Codjoe: My Lord, I require the proceedings to examine the witness…to show him the testimony of prosecution witnesses and their cross-examination that A1 micro managed him.
