Former Executive Director of Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG), Dr. Anim Kwapong has in clear terms told the high court hearing the trial of former COCOBOD boss and two others that Lithovit foliar fertilizer has at all material times known to scientists at CRIG as a liquid product.
“And also, we have always known the product as lithovit and it has always been a liquid product”, he told the court now presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh on Thursday, January 11, 2024.
The former CRIG boss’s testimony sharply contradicts and discredits the prosecution’s long-held assertion that Lithovit fertilizer known to CRIG was powder.
It was the case of the prosecution that the Lithovit foliar fertilizer that Agricult Ghana Limited submitted to COCOBOD and forwarded to CRIG for testing was powder, but the then chief executive of COCOBOD, between 2014 and 2016, rather bought a liquid substance, which the state claimed was untested.
The former COCOBOD Chief Executive, Dr. Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo as well as Agricult Ghana Limited, are therefore on trial facing 27 charges, including defrauding by false pretense, willfully causing financial loss to the state, corruption by public officers and contravention of the Public Procurement Act in the purchase of Lithovit liquid fertiliser between 2014 and 2016.
Dr. Anim Kwapong, who is the 8th defence witness, on two occasions – in 2015 and 2016 – after recommendations by CRIG’s Committee for Testing Chemicals and Machines (CTCM) and based on his own “due diligence” approved and signed the certificate of lithovit foliar fertilizer, paving way for COCOBOD to purchase the product.
But the first prosecution witness, Dr. F.M. Amoah in October 2018 claimed in court that “the certificate issued by Dr. Anim Kwapong in 2015 and 2016 simply said Agricult lithovit, and it did not state it was a liquid fertilizer. And my lord there is no evidence at CRIG that indicated that Agricult’s lithovit has been tested at CRIG or reevaluated.”
The lead counsel for Seidu Agongo, Benson Nutsukpui therefore asked the witness under cross examination, whether when he issued the certificate in 2015 and 2016, he had any doubt that it was issued for a liquid fertilizer.
Dr. Anim Kwapong maintained, “My Lord I have no doubt at all.”
Dr. Kwapong was the Executive Director of CRIG between September 2014 and January 2017. He retired from COCOBOD on 11th December 2022 as the Director of Monitoring and Evaluation, CODAPEC/HiTECH of CHED.
The witness was asked, “Is it true that there is no evidence at CRIG that indicated that Agricult’s lithovit was ever tested at CRIG or reevaluated?”
Dr. Kwapong answered, “My Lord it is not true that there is no evidence. We went through the full rigours of testing, per the information by CTCM and also I have mentioned that I did exercise due diligence before signing any document that was brought to me.
“I had my secretary who did all the leg work, provide the information that I required to sign the document. I must add that my secretary also worked with Dr. Amoah, was in his office when he was signing all the documents and did not bring anything contrary to my attention. And also we have always known the product as lithovit and it has always been a liquid product.”
Dr. Anim Kwapong also confirmed to the court that the certificate he signed for lithovit came to him through the CTCM.
According him, it “cannot be correct”, another claim by the second prosecution witness, Dr. Alfred Arthur, that from 2014 no reevaluation was done at CRIG on lithovit.
“Any other position that because a fertilizer has not been tested for three or four years, a strict law of COCOBOD has been broken, cannot be true,” lawyer Benson Nutsukpui also asked the witness, which he replied, “My Lord that is right”.
Find excerpts of the proceedings below
Q. You told this court that before renewal of certificates for fertilizers by CRIG when you were the executive director, the scientists do reevaluation that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. On the 18th of October 2018 pw1 in the person of Dr. Amoah told the court that only CRIG does surveys to collect opinion of farmers to assess performance of fertilizers for COCOBOD. Would that be correct
A. My Lord that is partly correct. Because when I was in CHED our annual report like CODAPEC HITECH contains some information on farmers reaction and the use of agrochemicals
Q. So it is true that CHED in the course of its duty also report of its interaction with farmers, extension officers etc
A. My Lord that is also correct
Q. On the 18 October 2018. Dr. Amoah made this statement “My Lord CHED is an extension wing of COCOBOD and their main function is to implement their recommendations research findings from CRIG and not to conduct a survey for chemicals that has been supplied to farmers. My Lord, the surveys or interviews are done by CRIG staff “. Now Sir, one is that correct
A. My Lord as I said previously that is not the whole truth. My Lord I will add that there was time when there was an anomis caterpillar. There was an outbreak of this caterpillar on cocoa and the insecticide used to control the infestation did not work as expected so it was the CHED staff who made a complaint for the insecticide to be changed. My lord I also have a body called CRETEC (Cocoa Research Technical Committee). This committee is chaired by the executive director of CHED. It is a joint committee of research and extension. And it is to facilitate the bilateral flow of information from extension to research, and from research to extension.
Q. Who undertake research
A. My Lord for crop protection and production research, CRIG has that mandate.
Q. When you just said a joint committee to facilitate the bilateral flow of information, the term of we lay men would be cooperation between CHED and CRIG.
A. My Lord definitely
Q. On the same day, in an answer to a question that CHED has a report in respect of their interactions with farmers on the use of various chemicals as their official report. Dr. Amoah answered, “it would be an official report if it is their mandate to carry out reevaluation”. Sir, is it the case that there is that dichotomy of what officials CHED finds on the field and that CHED can’t report its finding, is that the case
A. My Lord, how would CHED provide feedback to CRIG on issues that happened on the field in terms of recommendations made by CRIG. I want to say it this way, for example I’m a CHED staff I go to a field, I see a problem pertaining or relating to a CRIG recommendation, I record the problem, how do I report that problem to CRIG. I am trying to say that anytime there is a problem on the field, CHED has to report to CRIG
Q. Is CHED bound to submit the report on their findings only to CRIG or their findings can be channeled to COCOBOD in CHED’s report
A. My Lord both channels are applicable
Q. So Dr. Amoah’s statement which I read to you that “it would only be an official report if that is their mandate”, cannot mean that report of CHED based on the findings of their extension officers, farmers and farm agents cannot be an official report of COCOBOD because the mandate of CHED is not to reevaluate for recertification, that cannot be what he meant. In other term what he said cannot be true
A. My Lord a CHED report cannot be a basis for renewing certificate because CRIG has its own mechanism of going to field to collect data through surveys and other means, and this can be corroborated or added on to by report from CHED.
Q. When you were at CHED, CHED prepared reports, that is correct
A. My Lord yes
Q. In those report, CHED bring out the findings of its extension officers and farmer’s agents on various agrochemicals, insecticides and other activities related to the farmers at the time being reported on, that is also correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And when you were at CHED, CHED’s prepared report are sent to COCOBOD that’s correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And COCOBOD is perfectly entitled to direct action based on those report from CHED.
A. My Lord that is correct through CRETEC.
Q. And CRETEC is chaired by the head of CHED.
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. So that report from CHED are also official report of COCOBOD
A. My Lord that is correct. I have to indicate that the deputy chief executive in charge of agronomy and quality control sits in the meeting of CRETEC.
Q. Anybody who says the report of CHED cannot not be an official report of COCOBOD cannot be telling the truth
A. My Lord that is so
Q. Dr. Amoah in answering the question, confirmed that “CHED is the interface with farmers and COCOBOD”. That’s correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And being the interface, it can only bring its findings on board through reports
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. CODAPE HiTECH were under CHED that’s correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. And that did not change in 2014, 2015 and 2016
A. My Lord between 2014 and 2017 I didn’t have much information about CHED, but from 2017 up to 2022 CODAPEC HITECH was under CHED.
Q. Dr. Amoah confirmed that when CHED interacts with farmers, their aim is to ensure that they protect the interest of cocoa by ensuring any problem that affect the interest of cocoa are brought to the attention of COCOBOD
A. My Lord that is true.
Q. You know Dr. Baah
A. My Lord yes I do
Q. He was the head of CHED whilst you were the head of CRIG, that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. If I told you he produced a report of CHED on farmers’ views that would be within his legitimate duties
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Now, Dr. Amoah on recertification has this to say “my Lord I cannot confirm if CRIG went through their processes before issuing these certificates since I was not in the system. Andy more so my Lord, this certificate was different from what was issued in 2015. This certificate of Lithovit foliar fertilizer with the trademark R on it has been tampered with by the mother company Zeovita GMBH from Germany, the original product…” You were there at the time when the certificate was renewed, did CRIG go through the processes when the certificate of Lithovit was renewed
A. My Lord I was the executive director from September 2014, and from that date we went through the full processes before renewal. My Lord I signed two certificates for Lithovit, one in 2015 and the other in 2016. The 2015 certificate as I mentioned here previously came to me as an original certificate, and 2016 was for a renewal. My Lord, for the first time, I’m hearing about a certificate issued in 2014 I’m yet to see that certificate.
Q. Sir, the certificate of 2014 was signed by Dr. Amoah, you were not in office then. You signed certificate when you assumed office from September, that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Sir Dr. Amoah on the 10th day of October 2018 told the court “and my lord the certificate issued by Dr. Anim Kwapong in 2015 and 2016 simply said Agricult lithovit, and it did not state it was a liquid fertilizer. And my lord there is no evidence at CRIG that indicated that Agricult lithovit has been tested at CRIG or reevaluated.” I will ask you three questions. The certificate you issued in 2015 and 2016, did you have any doubt that it was issued for a liquid fertilizer
A. My Lord I have no doubt at all.
Q. Is it true that there is no evidence at CRIG that indicated Agricult lithovit was ever tested at CRIG or reevaluated
A. My Lord it is not true that there is no evidence. We went through the full rigours of testing, per the information by CTCM and also I have mentioned that I did exercise due diligence before signing any document that was brought to me. I had my secretary who did all the leg work, provide the information that I required to sign the document. I must add that my secretary also worked with Dr. Amoah, was in his office when he was signing all the documents and did not bring anything contrary to my attention. And also we have always known the product as lithovit and it has always been a liquid product.
Q. Now , Dr. Arthur is also a scientist at CRIG that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. On November 2018, Dr. Arthur told the court that ” my Lord after submitting my report to Mr. Afrifa no reevaluation was carried out by soil science division of CRIG.” This was in an answer to a question by the prosecution if there was any reevaluation prior to the 2017 evaluation.
A. My Lord that statement cannot be correct. Because my Lord we have the CODAPEC HITECH report of 2015 and 2016 which was submitted to COCOBOD which I also used in signing other certificates.
Q. Prior to 2017 did the CTCM at CRIG go through proper procedures and brought certificates to your table
A. That is correct
Q. And the certificate you signed for lithovit came to you also through the CTCM
A. That is also correct
Q. So in simple terms, Dr. Arthur said from 2014 no reevaluation was done at CRIG on lithovit
A. My Lord that cannot be correct
Q. Who put the components, the synthetic on the report
A. That information is put on by the CTCM by the secretary who prepared the certificates
Q. So that is never a personal act of the director of CRIG, that is correct
A. My Lord that is correct
Q. Now, Dr. Arthur told the court in an answer to the question, “Dr. Arthur I believe that you know that CRIG has no strict policy that all fertilizers are tested for a period of four years and that testing was based on protocol you were speaking the truth” and he answered “yes my Lord” . That statement is true
A. My Lord that statement is true and I have explained that here
Q. Any other position that because a fertilizer has not been tested for three or four years, a strict law of COCOBOD has been broken, cannot be true
A. My Lord that is right
Q. Whilst you were at CRIG, products bought by COCOBOD after approval were not brought to CRIG to confirm before they are supplied to farmers, that is the position.
A. My Lord that is so
Q. When Dr. Arthur stated that in the case of Lithovit there was a breach as when the product was bought it was not brought to CRIG to authenticate if that was what was tested, is not the normal procedure
A. My Lord that is true and in my statement to EOCO I mentioned the need for that to be done
Q. When scientists at CRIG used a particular fertilizer as a standard then it means that its properties or qualities are well known to them
A. My Lord that is true
Q. So Dr. Arthur on the 26th of November 2018 agreed that Lithovit was used as a standard testing of fertilizers on seedlings in December that would mean that they had concluded testing of Lithovit on seedlings,
A. That is correct, and they must have used it as a standard against others
Q. Dr. Anim Kwapong, the chemical components that come on the certificate are based on what your scientists find and bring to your attention that is correct
A. My Lord that information is provided by the supplier
Q. Is it verified by CRIG
A. Yes my Lord
Q. It is verified by CRIG and it is only the chemical composition which CRIG verifies and can attest to that they put on the certificate
A. My Lord that is true
Q. The product supplier A2 and A3 have no hand in the composition that is embossed on the certificate
A. My Lord that is true but they also have to confirm
