It has been revealed that COCOBOD through CRIG in July 2017 wrote to Agricult Ghana Limited for the renewal of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer certificate, a product the Attorney General’s Department claims is substandard.
Evidence was adduced in court on December 2, 2020, to confirm that indeed, Agricult Ghana Limited, producers of Lithovit liquid fertilizer, paid COCOBOD for the cost of that renewal.
COCOBOD’s Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG) subsequently issued Agricult Ghana Limited with an official receipt numbered 006516 to acknowledge and confirm it has received a payment of GH¢3,000 for it to renew the certificate of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer.
“On the 71h July 2017, in a letter referenced CRIG/39/14/vo1.23/3429, CRIG invited the 3rd accused person to pay the sum of GHC3,000.00 as the re-assessment and evaluation fee for the renewal of CRIG certification for the Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer for the year 2018,” counsel for Seidu Agongo and Agricult, lawyer Nutifafa Nutsukpui told the court based on documents which are already in the exhibit. But the witness said he was not aware of the payment.
This came up during the cross-examination of 6th prosecution witness Peter Osei Amoako who is the Director of Finance at COCOBOD.
The state in 2018 pressed 27 charges against former COCOBOD boss, Dr Stephen Opuni together with Seidu Agongo the Chief Executive of Agricult Gnana Limited for the purchase of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer between 2014 and 2016. The accused persons have denied all the charges and are currently on self-recognition bail of GH¢300,000 each.
The charges hinged on claims that the fertilizer in question, Lithovit, was not duly tested before it was issued with a certificate, but defence counsel has been able to produce documents emanating from the custody of COCOBOD contradicting that claims. The assertion by the Attorney General portraying the fertilizer as substandard and unsuitable for use on matured cocoa left much to be desired as farmers rather praised the fertilizer and placed a request for its supply, Cocoa Health Extension Division report revealed in court.
In court on Wednesday, December 2, the witness was asked if he knows the process of renewal of certification at CRIG, which he answered in the negative.
“No my Lord, it is done by the scientists,” Peter Osei Amoako conceded.
The lawyer then asked the witness, “So when the scientists invite the 3rd accused person to follow a process towards the renewal of certification of its products, you cannot justifiably question that, can you?”
“No, my Lord,” Peter Osei Amoako admitted.
Meanwhile, COCOBOD’s purchase of 200,000 litres of No. 1 Liquid Fertilizer produced by Kumark Company Limited came up again in court.
The contract signed on 16th June 2017 was witnessed by Peter Osei Amoako. This is the contract the witness initially denied his own signature but later admitted he signed that contract as a witness after he was threatened with forensic verification.
Counsel for the accused sought to prove that COCOBOD never tested that fertilizer but it went ahead to procure it.
Though the witness could not confirm when the sample was sent to COCOBOD for testing and when it was tested, he insisted there is a CRIG certificate indicating that the No. 1 Liquid Fertilizer has been duly tested for two years.
Interestingly, when the Attorney General’s Department submitted documents covering that transaction it did not include any certificate to back the witness’ claim.
Justice Clemence Honyenuga, a Supreme Court judge sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court, therefore ordered Peter Osei Amoako to produce a copy of the CRIG certificate in the next adjourned date, which is December 9, 2020.
Meanwhile, Peter Osei Amoako on November 30 told the court that he was not part of management at COCOBOD as the Director of Finance.
He, however, beat a retreat on December 2, when confronted with evidence on the website of COCOBOD which named him among others as COCOBOD management members.
“So did COCOBOD erred in listing the directors including yourself as part of the management of COCOBOD on the said website?”, the witness was asked.
He replied, “I don’t think so my lord”.
Read excerpts of Wednesday’s proceedings
Q: How are foliar fertilizers applied
A: My Lord. I cannot determine how they are applied because My Lord I am not a scientist
Q: Sir you see. Foliar Fertilizers by their very nature are sprayed directly unto the leaves and stems of the crops that they are being applied to.
A: My Lord, what I know is that each fertilizer has its own application rates but how it is done I do not know
Q: Sir you see, in the 2015 field visit carried out by CHED they found out that farmers who used Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer particularly liked that fertilizer and requested for more.
A: My Lord as I said earlier if it comes to the impact assessment of fertilizer it is done by CRIG because they carry out the initial test and they will be able to ascertain the impact of fertilizer on cocoa after application. My Lord. it will be better for whoever did the CHED report to speak to this report
Q: Sir you see, this expression of the farmers preference for Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer is duly captured in the CHED 2015 field visit report. I am putting that to you.
A: My Lord. as I said whoever undertook that exercise is in the better position to speak to it.
Q: At Cocobod any time there are complaints from the farmers in respect of any cocoa farm inputs including fertilizers those complaints would get the attention of management of Cocobod, is that correct.
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: Sir, being a member of management at Cocobod, how many farmer complaints are you aware of on the use of the Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer.
A: My Lord. I am not aware of any complaints
Q: Now Sir, did you tell this court that you are the official custodian of financial records of the corporate head office and the Divisions of Cocobod.
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: Are you aware on the 20th November 2014 in a letter referenced CRIG/4NOL 54/7014, CRIG invited the 3rd accused person to pay the sum of GHC6492 50 as the cost of re-assessment and evaluation towards the renewal of CRIG certification for the Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer for the year 2015
A: No, My Lord I am not aware.
Q: Sir, that letter was signed by one Dr K. Opoku ¬Ameyaw, do you know him?
A: My Lord, I know him by name but we have never met before.
Q: Again on the 7th July 2017, in a letter referenced CRIG/39/14/vo1.23/3429, CRIG invited the 3rd accused person to pay the sum of GHC3,000.00 as the re-assessment and evaluation fee for the renewal of CRIG certification for the Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer for the year 2018, are you aware, Sir.
A: My Lord, I am not aware.
Q: Sir you see, CRIG raised the invoice numbered IN00000000940 on the said GHC3,000.00 as renewal of CRIG certificate for the Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer for the year 2018, are you aware.
A: No. My Lord
Q: And indeed CRIG received payment from the 3rd accused person and by official receipt numbered 006516 acknowledged the said GGC3,000.00 as payment for renewal of CRIG certificate for Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer 2018, did you come across this in your financial records.
A: No, My Lord
Q: Now you don’t know the process of renewal of certification at CRIG, do you.
A: No, My Lord it is done by scientists.
Q: So when the scientists invite the 3rd accused person to follow a process towards the renewal of certification of its products, you cannot justifiably question that, can you.
A: No, My Lord.
Q: Sir, what is Exhibit 36. what is that document
A: It is Notification of Award.
Q: Who signed Exhibit 36.
A: Dr Yaw Adu Ampomah.
Q: What is the date on that exhibit?
A: 17 May 2017.
Q: Sir, were you at post then as the Director of Finance
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: To your knowledge, Cocobod procured the product covered by Exhibit 36, that is true.
A: Yes. My Lord
Q: Did Cocobod execute a contract in respect of that product
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: Do you recall who signed on behalf of Cocobod.
A: No, My Lord.
Q: Did you as Director of Finance witness that contract
A: My Lord, sitting here I cannot recall
Q: Do you know when Cocobod received a sample of that product for testing.
A: No, My Lord.
Q: So I take it you don’t know whether in fact any test was carried out on that product.
A: No, My Lord. My Lord, the scientists should be able to tell.
Q: By the Notification of Award payment for that product was supposed to be effected 30 days after delivery, is that correct.
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: Being the Director of Finance, you are aware that Cocobod paid for that product, is that correct
A: This is the notification if the services were provided then Cocobod will pay.
Q: Sir you see, when it came to the payment of Lithovit which happened in 2014 you recalled specific dates and amounts of payments, so you know Cocobod in fact paid for these products in Exhibit 36.
A: My Lord, I do not recall
Q: Sir. kindly take a look at Exhibit 37 what is the date of that Exhibit Sir.
A: 17th May 2017.
Q: And Exhibit 37 was again signed by Dr Yaw Adu Ampomah, that is correct
A: Yes My Lord.
Q: What is Exhibit 37.
A: Is notification of contract award
Q: For what product.
A: For number 1 Liquid fertilizer.
Q: To your knowledge, Cocobod procured this product covered by Exhibit 37, did it not.
A: My Lord, if the contract was signed then it went ahead to procure.
Q: Please confirm to the court that by this date you were at post as Director of Finance.
A: Yes My Lord.
Q: Kindly take a look at Exhibit 52. Do you recognize Exhibit 52?
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: What is it?
A: Contract for the supply of 200.000 litres of No.1 Liquid Fertilizer between Ghana Cocoa Board and Kumark Company Ltd.
Q: Sir. When was it signed?
A: 16th June 2017, My Lord.
Q: Who signed for Cocobod.
A: Honourable Joseph Boahen Aidoo. CE
Q: Who witnessed that contract
A: Peter Oset Amoako.
Q: Sir, that is the contract in respect of the notification of award which is Exhibit 37, that is correct.
A: Yes, My Lord
Q: So Cocobod procured these products in fact, that is correct
A: Yes, My Lord.
Q: When were samples for No 1 Liquid Fertilizer received by Cocobod for testing.
A: My Lord, I do not know.
Q: You don’t also know whether or not that product had been tested by CRIG, that is correct.
A: My Lord, if the product is not tested Cocobod would not purchase it.
Q: When was it tested.
A: My Lord. the scientists at CRIG would be able to tell us.
Q: So you witnessed this contract based on the assumption that it had been duly tested, that is true.
A: My Lord, I did not witness this contract based on assumption because the contract I witnessed had a valid certificate.
Q: So the CRIG certificate provides you the assurance that that product had been tested by CRIG, is that the case.
A: My Lord, the CRIG certificate would show that the product has been or should have been tested for a minimum of two years
Q: Sir, can you show us on the certificate attached to Exhibit 52 where this is stated
A: My Lord, the document I have here does not have the certificate attached but My Lord I know there was a certificate attached to this and if I am given the opportunity I will bring the certificate on the next adjourned date.
