The Edo House of Assembly on Wednesday commenced impeachment proceedings against the state Deputy Governor, Philip Shaibu.
The Majority leader, Charity Aiguobarueghian, who announced the impeachment notice during plenary, said the petition dated March 5, was signed by 21 out of the 24 members against the deputy governor.
Aiguobarueghian stated, “The petition against the deputy governor came in on March 5 and was signed by 21 out of the 24 members. The number of members who signed the petition was more than the two-third requirement stipulated in the constitution.”
He also said that the petition was based on two grounds perjury and revealing of government secrets.
The speaker of the House, Blessing Agbebaku who acknowledged receipt of the petition, directed the Clerk of the House, Yahaya Omogbai, to serve Shaibu the impeachment notice.
Agbebaku also gave the deputy governor seven days to respond to the notice of impeachment.
The impeachment notice is the latest in the rift between the state Governor, Godwin Obaseki and his Deputy, who have been at loggerheads since mid-last year when Shaibu announced his intention to run for the office of the governor of the state.
The Court of Appeal, Abuja division, has affirmed Julius Abure as the National Chairman of Labour Party, LP.
The appellate court on Wednesday set aside the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory which restrained Abure and two others from parading themselves as national officers of the party.
However, in the judgment on Wednesday, Justice Hamman Barka held that the high court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction on the matter.
Delivering judgment in the appeal filed by Abure challenging the decision of the high court, Justice Barka, leading a three-member panel of Justices of the Court of Appeal, held that Abure’s appeal had merit and was accordingly allowed.
He said, “The judgement of the lower court is hereby set aside” Justice Barka held and awarded a cost of N1 million against the respondents to be to Abure.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has rejected the Federal Government’s attempt to retry the former governor of Abia and the senator representing Abia North, Orji Uzor Kalu, in the N7.6bn fraud case preferred against him.
Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High Court had on December 5, 2019, sentenced the former governor to 12 years in prison for allegedly stealing public funds while in office.
Also, the Abia State Government House Director of Finance and Accounts during Kanu’s tenure, Ude Udeogu, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for the offence.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had charged Kalu, Udeogu, and Kanu’s company, Slok Nigeria Limited for conspiracy and diversion of N7.65bn from the coffers of the state.0:03 / 1:01
Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Federal High Court, Kalu, and Udeogu filed an appeal to challenge their sentencing at the apex court.
The apex court’s judgement delivered by Justice Ejembi Eko, declared the conviction of the appellants as null and void on the ground that Idris was already a Justice of the Court of Appeal at the time he delivered the judgment.
Justice Eko further held that a Justice of the Court of Appeal cannot operate as a judge of the Federal High Court.
Kalu, however, went back to the Federal High Court and obtained an order restraining the EFCC from re-trying him.
Justice Inyang Edem Ekwo who issued the prohibition order against EFCC said that Kalu was not expressly stated in the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Dissatisfied, the apex government appealed against the decision of the high court.
Reading the lead judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joseph Oyewole dismissed the appeal over the failure of the government to produce proper records of the high court proceedings.
Justice Oyewole also held that the record brought by the government was not reliable for the request to be granted.
Oyewole said, “The record of an appeal brought by the federal government was incompetent and unreliable for any court to use to grant the request of the government.”
He also pointed out that the record of appeal brought was not compiled, signed, and certified by any person known to law.
“The name of the person who compiled signed, and certified the record was not reflected as required by law,” he added.
The International Monetary Fund, IMF, yesterday asked the Federal Government to pay immediate attention to food insecurity in the country.
The IMF’s position came on a day governors said Nigeria must go into production if it must get the people out of the current hardship.
At the 16th Edition of the Leadership Annual Conference and Awards, the IMF made its position known in its End-of-Mission statement issued after the completion of the IMF Staff 2024 Article IV Mission to Nigeria.
This is even as former Anambra State governor and 2023 presidential candidate of Labour Party, LP, Mr Peter Obi, who decried the hardship in the country, said he was not desperate to be president but “desperate to make Nigeria work.”
Also, former Deputy Governor (Financial Stability) of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, Professor Kingsley Moghalu, advocated the sale of government assets to raise funds, totalling $18-20 billion, which could be channelled into bolstering foreign reserves to stabilize forex and overcome economic woes.
However, President Bola Tinubu urged Nigerians to be patient, assuring them that his economic reforms will stabilize the country.
President Tinubu, Obi and Moghalu also spoke at the Leadership annual event, which served as a stage for political figures, statesmen and other dignitaries to highlight the importance of increasing productivity as a means of elevating Nigeria from her current state of hardship and steering her toward economic stability and strength.
The Asanko Gold Ghana Ltd (Asanko), operators of the Asanko Gold Mine in the Ashanti Region, has condemned the murder of its contracted security personnel and a civilian by illegal miners at Tontokrom.
It has called for swift investigations to bring the perpetrators to justice.
The State Security Personnel during periodic patrols within the mining communities visited the Tontokrom Concession belonging to Asanko on Saturday, March 2, 2024.
A statement issued by management of the mining company on Monday said while the officials of the licensed private security service provider were patrolling the Tontokrom Concession, they were attacked by the illegal miners who were hiding in the bushes.
Upon seeing the illegal miners emerging from the bushes with various guns, clubs, machetes and other weapons, the security officers chose to retreat since they were unarmed.
Two of the private security officers and a civilian were captured and lynched to death by these illegal miners
Management of the mining company noted that over the years now, illegal miners, who are not residents at Tontokrom, have been encroaching on Asanko’s legally held concessions and that these illegal miners harass both the staff of Asanko and its contractors.
The activities of these illegal miners, Asanko noted, are erasing all the efforts that the government and its officers are putting in to make Ghana the premier mining investment destination in the world.
It, therefore, urged the security agencies to investigate the matter and bring the perpetrators to book and assured that Asanko Mines remains committed to the safety of its employees, contractors and community members.
Joseph Boahen Aidoo, Chief Executive (CE) of Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), says over 44,769 farms would be released to about 29,441 farmers across the 57 cocoa districts in the country. The over 44,769 farms were diseased farms that underwent treatment.
Mr. Aidoo disclosed this during the inauguration of the governing council of the Bunso Cocoa College in Accra yesterday.
He recounted the numerous challenges the board has had to face in its quest to build a resilient cocoa sector, saying “however, it is refreshing to note that amidst the myriad of issues, great steps have been taken to position the sector on a path of recovery and development. While some of these steps have immediate effects, others have rather future impacts on the industry.”
On the inauguration, he said the college would be graduated to the status of a university to provide the needed support for farmers in the cocoa sector.
He said: “we find a big space for products from the College to support farmers to establish their farms, especially against the backdrop that most cocoa farmers in Ghana are absentee farmers.
Again, the concept of the cocoa plantation advocacy, which the Board is encouraging provides yet another grey area that our students can explore to bring their rich knowledge to bear.”
As the Chancellor, Mr. Aidoo was hopeful that the inauguration of the Governing Council of the Bunso Cocoa College would add another layer of building the governance structure of the institute to realise robustness in its function of producing the right calibre of students to support the sustainability of the cocoa sector.
Dr Ebenezer Owusu, Deputy CE Agronomy and Qualify Control (A&QC), chairman of the Council, thanked the Chancellor and promised to discharge their duties in accordance with the law and the policy of the college.
He added that they will do their very best to stir the affairs of the college to promote a learning environment that supports outcomes.
The Council is made up of eight members and they are: Dr Mercy Asamoah, Rector, Francis Cudjoe, Dr. Michael Obour Opoku, programmes coordinator lecturers, Armstrong Kwame Morny, Emmanuella Akosua Asamoah, Alumni, and Samuel Owusu, SRC president.
Others are Rev. Prof. Asare Danso, a senior retired lecturer of University of Cape Coast (UCC), Mr Yaw Akrofi, a retired principal Research Scientist at CRIG, Dr. Eureka Emefa Ahadjie Adomako, senior lecturer, Department of Plant and Environment Biology, University of Ghana and two others from the Ministry of Food and Agriculture and UCC.
Alex Asante Afrifa, Head of the Soil Science Division of the Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG), in a statement to the Economic and Organized Crime Office (EOCO) questioned the source of a lithovit foliar fertiliser tested by the Chemistry Department of University of Ghana and the Ghana Standard Authority (GSA).
According to him, the lithovit foliar fertiliser he led a team of scientists to analyze, did not have any adverse effects on cocoa seedlings and that they even advised its continuous application on cocoa trees.
He could not, therefore, come to terms with the test reports by the Chemistry Department of University of Ghana and GSA that the product was not a fertiliser, as he doesn’t know the source of the lithovit they tested.
Mr A.A. Afrifa challenged these test reports because the Soil Science Division established from their study that lithovit helped in getting the nutrients to the plant.
Mr A. A. Afrifa’s statement was referred to by Samuel Codjoe, counsel for Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni, during cross examination of Paul Agyei Gyang, a senior officer at EOCO on Monday.
Lawyer Codjoe found the statement of A.A. Afrifa relevant to Dr Opuni’s defence, due to the charge of procuring an adulterated fertiliser from Seidu Agongo and his company, Agricult Ghana Limited, suppliers of lithovit fertiliser for cocoa farmers.This singular act allegedlycaused the country to lose GH¢271.3 million.
Dr Opuni, a former Chief Executive of Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) together with Agongo and Agricult are facing 27 counts for allegedly engaging in illegalities.
It is known to the court that the source of the lithovit fertiliser that was tested by University of Ghana Chemistry Department and that of GSA was supplied by Dr Yaw Adu Ampomah, complainant and a former Deputy Chief Executive of Agronomy and Qualify Control (A&QC) at COCOBOD.
A third test on the agro product, which the supplier was involved in the picking up of the sample and sent to the same GSA, this timeproved that the lithovit was a fertiliser.
Law Courts Complex, Accra
Lawyer Codjoe at this point told the Land Division of the Accra High Court, presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh that it has become obvious to EOCO that the sample, which was sent to University of Ghana and the one later given to GSA were not the same.
Paul Agyei Gyang who has been subpoenaed by Seidu Agongo to testify in his defence, said it will be difficult to tell, since one was brought by the complainant and the other was a result of both parties agreeing on which sample to test.
Counsel added that Dr. Opuni in a letter to CRIG never instructed the scientist to issue any certificate for lithovit in January 2014 and the witness affirmed that saying the letter did not state so.
However, the prosecution led by the Chief State Attorney (CSA), Evelyn Keelson told the court that the fertiliser, which A.A Afrifa submitted a report on to COCOBOD is none other than lithovit folia fertiliser, a fine powder.
She also stated that since EOCO did not conclude its investigations into this case, the witness could not establish the complaint made by COCOBOD to his outfit.
Cross examination
Q: He was also the lead author on the lithovit?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: Mr Gyang, you will remember in the course of your investigation, you came across one A. A. Afrifa who was the Head of Soil Science Division at CRIG?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: This statement of the 5th April was a witness statement taken from A. A. Afrifa?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: In fact, you took a lot of statements from the said A. A. Afrifa in the investigation concerning this matter?
A; That is so my lord.
Q: Can you take a look at a statement dated 5th April 2017, and confirm to this court that this is a statement, which was taken from A. A, Afrifa by EOCO?
A: Yes my lord, we took the statement from A.A. Afrifa
Q: This statement of the 5th April 2017, was a witness statement taken from A.A Afrifa?
A: Yes my lord that is so.
Counsel: I want to tender this document
Court: Any objection?
Prosecution: We have no objection
Counsel for A2&A3: We have no objection
Court: Document tendered through the witness and same is admitted and marked as Exhibit136/ A1.
Q: In fact, he mentioned in his statement that in the case of Sidalco, it a longer time of between 6 to… years to test. Is that not so?
A: Yes my lord he said so
Q: Can you also confirm that this was important because the complainant Adu Ampomah had stated in his numerous statements to EOCO that the minimum period for testing fertilisers is 3 years?
A: Yes my lord
Q: In his statement, can you confirm that he states that he has tested about 17 different types of fertilisers in the course of his employment at CRIG?
A: Yes my lord, he said so
Q: And he also said he didn’t have a fixed duration for testing fertilisers?
A: Yes my lord, he said so.
Q: He also mentioned that ‘Asaase wura’ and cocoa feed, it took three to four years?
A: It is so my lord
Q: And he gave an example in his statement and he said he compared the fertiliser literary to an aeroplane and a car as means for travelling. And according to him, lithovit was an aeroplane as compared to the other fertilisers being a car.
A: He said so my lord.
Q: And he mentioned that in the case of another product crop…testing took 5 to 6 years?
Ans: That is true my lord.
Q: And in fact, he mentioned that the reason why lithovit was special is ” lithovit used current and sophisticated approach in getting the nutrients to the plant.” Isn’t it?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: In this statement, he was very clear, convinced or lured in coming out with approval of lithovit for use on matured cocoa?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: Sir, can you confirm that he is very explicit that he would advise for the continuation of lithovit application on cocoa?
A: He said so my lord
Q: And in this statement, he, A.A Afrifa, stated that after the analysis and photoxity test, the lithovit did not have any adverse effects on cocoa seedlings of about two months. Isn’t that so?
A: He said so my lord
Q: But can you also remember that one of the accusations was this contained in Adu Ampomah statements to EOCO that lithovit was not good a fertiliser?
A: Yes my lord
Q: And the complaint was that first accused influenced the scientists in the test?
A: I can remember exactly.
Q: And these statements are totally different from that of Adu Ampomah who did not test the fertiliser and was not involved with the fertiliser in anyway about lithovit suitability?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: And your investigation revealed that Mr A. A. Afrifa was the Head of the Soil Science Division and they did the test?
A: It so my lord.
Q: You also took another witness statement from Mr Afrifa on the 12th of June 2017. Can you have a look at this statement and confirm whether this was the second statement taken from A.A. AFrifa?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: In this statement, Exhibit 137/A1, he states that lithovit foliar fertiliser is good for cocoa from the report submitted on it to COCOBOD. Is that not so?
A: It is so my lord.
Counsel for A1: My lord we want to tender this second statement of Mr. Alex Asante Afrifa (A. A Afrifa)
Court: Any objection?
Prosecution: My lord we have no objection
Counsel for A2&A3: My lord no objection
Court: The second witness statement of A.A. Afrifa dated 12th June 2017 is tendered through the witness DW1/A2&A3 without objection from both prosecution and counsel A2 and A3, and same is admitted and marked Exhibit 136/A1?
Q: You confronted him with the two test you have conducted?
A: That is so my lord.
Q: Can you confirm that as at the time he gave the statements, you have conducted two laboratory test on lithovit namely, one at GSA and one at the chemistry department of university of Ghana, which stated that lithovit wasn’t a good fertiliser?
A: That is so my lord.
Q: And he also stated that there was no decrease in cocoa Production as a result of the application of litovit folia fertiliser?
A: that is so my lord
Q: His first objection was that he doesn’t know the source of the lithovit, which was tested. Is that not so?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: And he challenged the results of these two test .is that not so?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: So you would agree that at this point, when you had these two reports, the Head of Soil Science Division, CRIG at COCOBOD who conducted the test challenged these two reports on the efficacy of lithovit fertiliser. Is that not so?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: Then he also challenged the method and procedures used in the test as he said these were unknown to him?
A: he said so my lord
Q: so that based on this objection with respect to the two results test, EOCO conducted a third test on litovit at the Ghana standards Authority, is that not so?
A: it is so my lord
Q: but you can confirm that at the time of giving this statement, Mr A.A Afrifa was still in the employment of CRIG and for that matter cocoa board.
A: it is so my lord
Q: if you can Also remember, the supplier of the fertiliser, which is Agricult also challenged these two findings on the fact that litovit was not a proper fertiliser. Is that not so?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: And this sample was picked from COCOBOD’s own warehouse?
A: That is so my lord.
Q: At that point, it would have become obvious to EOCO that the sample, which was sent to University of Ghana and the one which was earlier taken to GSA were not the same?
A: My lord, it will be difficult to tell. One was brought by the receiver, that is the complainant and the other was brought as a result of both parties agreeing on which sample to test.
Q: With regards to this third test, the supplier A3 was involved in the picking of sample that was sent to GSA for testing. Is that nor so?
A: Yes my lord, he was involved in the selection of the sample.
Q: If you can please confirm that the one which failed the test at the two places i.e., the Chemistry Department and GSA were brought by Dr Adu Ampomah to EOCO alone for testing?
A: I have said so.
Q: When you said in your answer that both parties agreed on the selection, what happened basically is that both parties went to the warehouse where this lithovit sample was stored?
A: that is so My lord.
Q: And in fact he concluded his statement by saying that “I still stand on the fact that lithovit foliar is good for cocoa production. Is that not so?
A : He said so my lord.
Q: And in this statement he stated that no farmers to his knowledge had complained about any ill performance about litovit liquid fertiliser?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: And you also became aware that the mode of instruction with respect to official act just as any other corporate organisation were all documented?
A: My lord, I did not delve into the corporate structure of COCOBOD, but it is presumed that as a public structure, orders were followed as counsel is saying.
Q: In fact, as at the time you handed over your investigations, there was no adverse report from COCOBOD apart from these two reports from GSA and University of Ghana, which doubted the efficacy of lithovit as a fertiliser for use on matured cocoa?
A: It is true my lord.
Q: during your investigation, first accused always insisted and maintained that he did not in any way interfere with the testing of lithovit?
A: Yes my lord, he did.
Q: And in your investigation, if you can remember, it became obvious and/or you find as a fact that COCOBOD and its divisions were well organised corporate structure?
A: Yes my lord it is so.
Q: Then you now have the same letter now with the minutes of CRIG, which was signed by Dr Adu Acheampong who was official of CRIG who was one of the people who minuted on the letter, Exhibit 131?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: Give him Exhibits C and 13.You have in your hands a letter dated 21st January 2014. It was first tendered as Exhibit C by PW1 without any minutes on the letter. Is that not so?
A: Yes my lord it is.
Q: And that these two reports, which doubted the efficacy of lithovit as a fertiliser were later debunked by the third test finding on lithovit, which stated that it was a fertiliser?
A: My lord, I wouldn’t say they were debunked but it was a different results on its own for prosecution to decide on it.
Q: Can you confirm that in that letter, first accused only approved a recommendation by CRIG, the scientific division of COCOBOD. Is that not so?
A: My lord, it is stated in the letter that management had approved….
Q: So in this letter, it is obvious to the whole world that first accused on his own did not make an independent recommendation but approved the recommendation made by CRIG on litovit?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: This is a letter brought to A3 concerning lithovit. And in this letter first accused, informed A3 that management had approved the recommendation from CRIG on the product. In your investigation, up to the time you handed over, did you have a copy of Exhibit 131, thus the CRIG copy with the minutes on it?
A: My lord, I don’t think we had the minutes.
Q: In fact in this letter, first accused informed the company Agricult that they may contactCRIG for any other information and or assistance.
A: it is so my lord.
Q: In this letter, first accused never instructed CRIG to issue any certificate for lithovit in January 2014?
A: Yes my lord, this letter does not state so.
Q: can you have a look at Exhibit D, which is the first certificate issued by PW1, Dr Franklin Amoah on 22nd January 2014, in respect of lithovit and confirm that this certificate came to the knowledge of EOCO during the investigation?
A: My lord, we came across many documents so I cannot be too sure.
Q: Can you confirm that the certificate i.e. Exhibit D was signed by PW1 on 22nd January 2014, before the receipt of the letter Exhibit 131 at CRIG?
A: Yes my lord, the certificate was signed on 22nd January 2014, whereas the letter authorising the certificate was received in 29th January 2014.
Q: on the Exhibit 131, can you confirm the date CRIG received the signed letter, first accused and copied to CRIG?
A: My lord the letter was sent on the 21st January 2014 and received at CRIG on 29th January 2014.
Q: So it is true that before CRIG received this COCOBOD letter, PW1, Franklin Amoah had signed Exhibit D on the 22nd January 2014. That is just the next day?
A: That is so my lord.
Q: Can you confirm that when this letter was received by CRIG, PW1 Franklin Amoah first minuted the letter to the chairman of the CTCM, Mr Akrofi on 29th January 2014?
A. Yes my lord it is so.
Counsel for A1: My lord, that will be all for the witness.
Cross examination by prosecution
Q: So that as at the time the CTCM ,which according both PW3, Dr. Adu Ampomah and PW1 Dr. Franklin Amoah is the body to recommend the issuance of a certificate for fertiliser and in this case lithovit, Dr Franklin Amoah had already signed and issued the certificate, Exhibit D?
A: Yes my lord.
Q: The fertiliser Mr. Afrifa is talking about is not the same as lithovit liquid fertiliser isn’t it?
A: He said lithovit folia fertiliser is good for cocoa per report submitted on it.
Q: So from what you read from exhibit 137 Mr Afrifa stated that he sent a report on litovit folia fertiliser to cocoa board. Is that not so?
A: It is so my lord.
Q: So Mr. Gyan, do you have exhibit 137. Please read from line 4 to line 6 on page one?
A: “I wish to say that the lithovit foliar fertiliser is good for cocoa per the reports submitted on it.”
Q: I am putting it to you that the report Mr Afrifa is talking about is exhibit B1?
A: Yes my lord, Exhibit 137 is a statement and Exhibit B1 is the report.
Q: Turn to Exhibit B1 and read to the hearing of this court?
A: lithovit foliar fertiliser is a very fine powder…
Q: You will agree with me that the fertiliser which A.A Afrifa submitted a report on to COCOBOD is none other than lithovit folia fertiliser, which is a fine powder?
A: My lord, that is what is captured in the report.
Q: So please you have Exhibit 135, it is a statement from AduAmpomah, read it?
A: During the review period, it was found that a liquid fertiliser lithovit had not been subjected to scientific testing.
Q: So I am putting it to you that from Exhibit 131 and Exhibit C, A1 was informing A2 and A3 and the whole world, as stated by counsel, that lithovit foliar fertiliser as evident by Exhibit B1 was what the management of cocoa board approved?
A: That is what the letter says.
Q: Mr Gyang, as Head of the organised crime of EOCO was not personally involved in the investigation of A1, A2 and A3?
A: Yes, you are right
Q. Mr. Paul Gyang, you do not remember a lot of things that happened in the course of the EOCO’s investigations into the case as you sit here?
A. Yes my Lord it has been some time
Q. This is also because EOCO did not conclude the investigations into this case, is that not so?
A. Yes my Lord, we did not conclude investigations into this case
Q. And because you did not conclude investigations into this case, you could not establish the complaint made by COCOBOD to your outfit?
A. That is so my Lord
Q. In fact by April 2017, from your diary of action, you had received information that the police CID were to take over the investigations?
A. My Lord, I can’t really remember the date, but we had the directive to hand over the dockets.
In a heartwarming display of compassion and generosity, Ghanaian music sensation Wendy Shay has stepped forward to support the ailing veteran actor KK Kabobo with a substantial cash donation.
KK Kabobo, a seasoned actor known for his contributions to Ghana’s film and television landscape, has been facing health challenges, prompting concerns from well-wishers and industry peers.
Wendy Shay took the initiative to offer financial assistance to ease the actor’s medical expenses.
The Rufftown Records signee, Wendy Shay, visited KK Kabobo personally to present the cash donation at the University of Ghana Medical Center.
Wendy Shay shared the heartfelt moment on her social media platforms, expressing her concern for KK Kabobo’s well-being and emphasizing the importance of standing together as a community during challenging times.
The post received an outpouring of support and appreciation from fans and fellow industry professionals.
Ghanaian Executive Chef, Faila Abdul Razak is geared and ready to represent Ghana in an International Horticultural Expo in Doha, Qatar on March 9.
Despite getting disqualified by GWR on her longest cooking attempt, things are looking great for Chef Faila.
She was invited by the Ghana Tourism Authority to collaborate with a resident caterer to showcase the rich flavors and cultural diversity of Ghana through its traditional dishes.
Faila will present Ghanaian delicacies and authentic Ghanaian drinks like millet drink, cocoa drink, and sobolo to international patrons at the event.
Chef Faila made the announcement in a Facebook post on Tuesday, March 5 and expressed her excitement to represent Ghana at the international event.
“Participating in the International Horticultural Expo is an incredible opportunity for me to share my passion for Ghanaian cuisine with a global audience,” said Executive Chef Faila.
She will leave Ghana on March 6 to participate in the event expected to end on March 12.
Chef Faila has turned her lemons to delicious lemonade and Ghanaians are proud of her.
In a spectacular showcase of national pride and fashion finesse, Ghanaian celebrities stole the spotlight while commemorating the nation’s Independence Day.
The event unfolded as a captivating fashion extravaganza, seamlessly encapsulating the themes of unity, culture, and elegance.
Social media platforms buzzed with activity as snapshots and videos flooded feeds, immortalizing the stars’ glamorous and style-forward choices. Celebrity’s ensemble not only reflected personal flair but also paid homage to Ghana’s rich cultural heritage.
Beyond the dazzling outfits, celebrities utilized their various platforms to convey heartfelt messages of gratitude and love for Ghana. These expressions underscored the significance of unity, progress, and the shared responsibility to contribute to the nation’s continuous growth.
As the curtain falls on this splendid Independence Day celebration, the images and moments captured by these influential personalities stand as a living testament to Ghana’s vibrant culture.
The fusion of elegance, tradition, and contemporary flair exhibited by the celebrities symbolizes a nation that takes pride in its history and remains optimistic about the promising future that lies ahead.
Social media platforms buzzed with activity as snapshots and videos flooded feeds, immortalizing the stars’ glamorous and style-forward choices. Celebrity’s ensemble not only reflected personal flair but also paid homage to Ghana’s rich cultural heritage.
