Court: How long will it take you to cross-examine DW1?

Counsel. A minimum of four sittings. Considered the witness testimony in chief took five sittings. This is somebody who had been on the board of COCOBOD for eight years and the prosecution had called seven witnesses and by reason of the court ruling of 7^th May 2021, were in documents that could have helped our cases in our view were excluded by the court and the court found that we had supplied worthlessness, adulterated fertilizer, and cost financial loss. 

Court: I was saying a minimum of two sittings will do.

Court: Can I hear you, Chief State Attorney?

CSA: My lord, Section 69 of the Evidence Act N.R.C.D. 323 gives this Honourable court the power to exercise reasonable control over the presentation of evidence in other to make interrogation, and presentation, my lord, through extermination in chief and cross-examination as rapid as it may be. My lord, two sittings of cross-examination of DW1 by counsel for A2 & A3 is reasonable, having regard to evidence in chief. That is my submission.

Court: I have stated that a maximum of two court sittings of cross-examinations of DW1 is very reasonable. This enables the court to effectively deal with this case. 

Q. Sir you told this Honourable court that you were first sworn onto the board of COCOBOD in June 2009?

A. Yes.

Q. From June 2009 when next was the board of COCOBOD reconstituted?

A. January 2014.

Q. January 2014, do you remember the date this board was sworn in?

A. I can’t remember

Q. This first board from June 2009 to January 2014, which you served, did have board committees?

A. Yes

Q. Did you serve in any of them?

A. I severed on two subcommittees.

Q. Which are these committees sir?

A. 1, staff appointment committee, and 2, subcommittee on finance.

Q. How were board decisions made on this board that you have served? 

A. At the preliminary board meeting, there was an issue on these two areas of adjournment, management would be invited by the board chair to present an overview of the issues. The board chair will refer the matter to the sub-committees to deliberate on it and report on the issue at the next sitting. At the subsequent board meeting, the subcommittee report would be presented and discussed. Decisions would then be made on the report at that meeting.

Q. Now, that decision on that report, how is it arrived at?

A. More often than not by consensus. 

Q. In the absence of that consensus, how did the board make its decisions?

A. My Lord, decisions are made by consensus. I don’t recall the time that there has been a division that may require a vote. 

Q. Now sir, does this board keep minutes?

A. Yes, there are minutes.

Q. So the board decisions are duly captured in minutes?

A. Yes.

Q. From the inception of your employment with COCOBOD in 2004, did any of the functions of your office or roles bring you into a knowledge of the workings of the board even before you became a board member?

A. Yes

Q. Please what role was it?

A. As a manager at the Head office, directly assisting the Director at the Head Office, there has been a couple of times when the audit has served to ascertain some facts to assist the board in their work. 

Q. Now, this first board you served from 2009-2012 was involved in the budgeting processes of COCOBOD

A. Yes

Q. Was that board also involved in the processes of approving the procurement plan of COCOBOD?

A. …

Q. What specifically the board has to do with the budget process?

A. One of the key factors of COCOBOD’s budget is fixing the producer price of cocoa. My lord, if I may explain. The producer price of cocoa is the price payable to the farmer or for a bag of 64kg of cocoa. This price is determined on the last day of September or the first day of October or the immediate announcement to the general public. This determination at that time has to be done by a committee chaired by the Minister for Finance under whose ministry COCOBOD at the time was. So the board chair of COCOBOD and all members have to be a the meeting. There were other stakeholders who also had been at that meeting, key among them apart from COCOBOD and finance ministry is a representative from Bank of Ghana. We have representatives from licensed buying companies and transporters we call them Haulers.

Q. Who has the responsibility of approving the final budget for COCOBOD for any particular year?

A. My Lord, it is the board after the consideration by the finance subcommittee.

Q. Now under the first board that you served on, COCOBOD did not procure goods that were approved in the budget.

A. I can’t recollect.

Q. As a director of finance in your experience, did COCOBOD pay for goods and services that have not been approved in any year?

A. My lord, I don’t recollect but the budget can be reviewed along the line depending on management representation. 

Q. Sir, by the practice when the budget of COCOBOD whether original or reviewed doesn’t authorised procurement as director of audit and finance, would you have authorised payments for any such services or goods if it was procured?

A. The procurement process would require authorisation in the budget and subsequently payment whether goods or services, payment for that would be made.

Q. Sir, in essence, every procurement might have been authorized by the budget.

A. That is correct. Significant items like fertilizers would be listed and other like normal office equipment would not be itemized, they would be in a group.

Q. Now sir, where would these significant items be listed. Is it in the budget? 

A. They would be in the procurement plan attached to the budget.

Q. The second board that you served on, according to you, was sworn in from 2014 till which period sir?

A. To December 2016

Q. Would you recall how many members were on this board?

A. Ghana COCOBOD has a statutory requirement on the number of persons on the board. I can’t recollect the exact number.

Q. Sir, do you remember who chaired this second?

A. The second board was chaired by Ambassador Ohene Agyakum.

Q. And would you remember some of the other members you served with on the other board?

A. The Governor of BoG, Mrs. Afriyie Haffar, deputy minister of finance – Ato Forson, and we had two farmers’ representatives – one Nana Damoah.

Q. Now this second, did you serve on any subcommittees as well?

A. Yes. I served on the finance committee of that board

Q. And did this board also have the responsibility of approving the final budget of COCOBOD in any year during the board’s tenure?

A. Yes

Q. So for the period 2014-2016, this second board had approved budgets in which significant items for procurement were still listed?

A. Yes.

Q. Now did the decision-making process differ in any from that of the first board that you served on where decisions were arrived at by consensus?

A. No.

Q. Was it ever possible on this second board for a sole board member to take any decision on behalf of the board or in the name of the board?

A. Yes and it is the chairman who will then inform the other members.

Q. If the board chairman took a decision on behalf of the board by practice the whole board must ratify that decision subsequently?

A. My Lord, I will not say exactly that and would explain. Ambassador Ohene Agyakum, the board chair, deals with the board in a very friendly manner. So if he announces or informs the members about an emergency that cropped up that required to make a decision on their behalf, more often than not members will say that chairman, “we respectfully agree.”

Q. Now sir, would you remember whether between 2014 and 2016, the budget for COCOBOD was approved by consensus or only by the chairman?

A. The budget as stated earlier on would always be approved by consensus.

Q. On December 2, 2021, you told the honourable court that any major procurements emanated from the approved budgets?

A. Yes

Q. You also said the financial year, starts from first October to 30th September the following year?

A. Yes

Q. According to you typically, the COCOBOD budget would have been approved in November of the year on which the year starts is that correct?

A. My lord that is correct. Let me explain. I mentioned earlier today that one of the key facts in the budget is the producer price and that would always be announced on the 1st of October. So after the announcement of the producer price that is when the budget becomes finalized and presented to the board in its subsequent meeting.

Q. Were the 2014-2016 budgets for COCOBOD approved in the same manner as far as you will recall?

A. Yes

Q. You said earlier today that the procurement plan is attached to the budget before the approval is given by the board. Is that correct?

A. Yes

Q. So in essence the board does approve the budget and the procurement plan?

A. Yes

Q. And once approved this procurement plan ordinarily would govern the procurement plan for the year in question?

A. Yes

Q. As far as you recall sir, between 2014 and 2016 were these steps in approving the budgets and procurement plans followed by the board that you served on?

A. Yes

Q. Specifically, the 2013/2014 budget of COCOBOD was approved in November 2013?

A. I will not say that it is approved by the board at the time. My explanation was that in November 2013, it was clear that there were going to be changed in the composition of the board. So I recall that as much as the board met, the discussion then was like o let’s leave it for the new board to come and handle it.

Q. Sir according to you, on 6/12/2021 was that when the new board was sworn in 2014 it reviewed the 2014 budget. Is that correct?

A. Yes

Q. And according to you, this second board requested the area for the coverage of fertilizer be expanded?

A. Yes

Q. According to you, this review process and the request for the expansion of the coverage area was it a decision of the whole board if you will remember?

A. I recall that after the inauguration, the board met and discussed this programme that led to the expansion. 

Q. So as far as you are concerned, this was a decision of the whole board and not by any single individual of the board?

A. Yes

Q. Now sir, was this process of reviewing 2013/14 budget, as far as you are aware was it influenced in any way by second and third accused persons?

A. My lord I didn’t know them?

Q. The decision to expand the coverage area for fertilizer application as far as you are aware was that decision of the board influenced by A2 & A3? 

A. I’m not aware.

Q. Sir, would you consider from your experience from serving on the board that the budget review process and the decision to expand the area of fertilizer coverage were normal board functions or decisions by this second board that you served in?

A. My Lord, what I recall at the time during discussions was that new products by way of fertilizer and agrochemicals do come in the market and so COCOBOD needs to make an allowance of these products as and when they are tested and approved by CRIG. So in the midst of these discussions of expansion was discussed and reviewed

Q. Would you consider the review as a normal board function that the board was carrying out?

A. My Lord, I don’t see anything odd about these discussions given the fact that the board members come from various backgrounds and they are supposed to make meaningful inputs to board discussions.

Q. Sir, You told this on 6/12/21 that in response to the board’s request for the expanded coverage, CODAPEC/HITECH provided a list of agrochemicals including fertilizers that would support the said expansion. Is that correct?

A. Yes my lord.

Q. And you identified Exhibit N (l) which you are now holding contains some of those agrochemicals provided by CODAPEC/HI-TECH?

A. Yes

Q. Now sir, you mentioned on 02/12/21 that one of the key units whose inputs are critical in the budget process was the CODAPE/ HITECH unit?

A. Yes

Q. You told the court also that this unit will submit the quantity of agrochemicals including fertilizers as well as their unit prices required for any particular year as part of the budget process?

A. Yes

Q. And this unit will also attend the budget hearings to defend their request just like any other unit in COCOBOD?

A. Until 2013/2014 that was the practice.

Q. What became the practice for this unit?

A. After 2013/14, this unit which was then reporting to Deputy Chief Executive A&QC was then moved to Cocoa Health and Extension Unit (CHED). So their reporting line changed. So subsequently, their activities were now reported on by the Executive Director CHED. 

Q. From the point of the change in the reporting line who presented the data that CODAPEC/Hi-tech used to provide as budgeting process?

A. Executive Director of CHED.

Q. Was there any change in the data that CODAPEC/HI-TECH used to submit as part of the budget process as a result of this change in the reporting line?

A. The change that may come would be that the CHED budget would include the budget for fertilizer and other agrochemicals.

Q. Sir, would you recall if this data being presented by CHED still have the qualities and the unit prices of the agrochemicals including fertilizers that were required in any particular year?

A. My Lord, as I said CHED budget will come with a whole lot of attachments. So I don’t recall specifically looking at the requirements in the way we have the 2013/14 one. But the attachment that CHED would submit would definitely have something similar.

Q. You told the court also that upon approval, a copy of the procurement plan is lodged with the PPA. Is that correct?

A. Yes

Q. Was this the case throughout your service on the board from 2009 to 2016?

A. 2009 to 2014, I wasn’t too much involved with the nitty-gritty of procurement apart from audit verifications of procurement. 2009 when I was on the board, I was a manager at a different division not in the head office. I was visiting the head office, chief executive office on the board issues. I came back to head office audit in January 2012 as Deputy Director of Audit. That is when I became a bit more involved in procurement issues at the head office.

Q. So nitty-gritty you mean details?

A. Yes.

Q. Sir but between 2014 and 2017, the procurement plans were for those years were lodged with the PPA?

A. Yes. That I can confirm.

Q. Sir as far as you are aware no supplier of goods or services to COCOBOD participates in these procurement processes you have described in this court?

A. I have no knowledge of any suppliers of goods and services having an influence of these processes. My lord what I want to add is that the suppliers through their representatives come often to COCOBOD to follow up with their issues.

Q. Sir you told this court also that as part of the audit process you verify from warehouses when the product called Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer was purchased and delivered to COCOBOD warehouses?

A: I want to add that I came back to COCOBOD as the Deputy Director and purchases of goods have to be verified by the Internal Audit Department before recommendations for payment would be made.

Q. Kindly take a look at Exhibit L. Are you familiar with this document?

A. Yes.

Q. Exhibit L is a letter under the hand of the Chief Executive at the time to the Secretary to Cabinet. Is that correct?

A. Yes

Q. Now, you were on the board by the date of this letter?

A. Yes

Q. Do you remember how this letter came to be sent to the Secretary to Cabinet?

A. My lord, after the inauguration of the new board, meetings were held and the expansion of the CODAPEC/HI-TECH programme was discussed and among the numerous ideas that came up at the meeting, one was to notify the Minister of Finance and Cabinet about the issues being discussed on the expansion programme. So when I saw a copy of this letter at audit it wasn’t news to me.

Q. What is the date on Exhibit L?

A. 11/02/2014

Q. Please have a look at Exhibit M. Are you familiar with this document also?

A. Yes, my lord.

Q. Which document is that?

A. This document is seeking approval to sole source fertilizers of the cocoa hi-tech programme of 2013/14.

Q. It is addressed to the Ministry of Finance?

A. Yes

Q. Does Exhibit M reflects the board’s decision you spoke about a while ago to notify Cabinet and the Minister for Finance?

A. Yes

Q. Please confirm to the court turned to the 2nd of Exhibits L and M that the list of fertilizers and their respective details are the same in both documents?

A. The details per the second pages of ex L and M appear to be the same

Q. Sir were these the products you spoke about earlier as having been submitted by CODAPEC/HI-TECH, which satisfied the expansion for coverage area for the fertilizer for 2013/14 requested by the Board?

A. Yes 

Q. Please take a look again at Exhibit M. What is the date on Exhibit M?

A. 19/03/2014

Q. On the second page of Exhibit M, directly on the table of that page, there is a paragraph can you read it to the honourable court

A. Provision for the said purchase has been made and the…20/03/2014 and the procurement plan.

Q. You were on the board at that time is that para a true reflection of the facts at that time

A. I will say yes with an explanation. Discussions about expanding the programme have been made so this list is not out of place…

Q. Please take Exhibits L, M & N confirmed that the products listed here are the same?

A. The products on the second page of Exhibits L, M & N are the same.

Q. Now sir, when you look at the second page of Exhibit N, Asase Wora is the first product on the table and by the company called Wienco?

A. Yes

Q. Please take a look at Exhibit 83, which is a letter from Wienco to the Ghana Cocoa board dated 25/02/2014, is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Exhibit 83 is providing details of Asase Wora, which has been addressed to the PPA?

A. My lord on the face of the letter, it appears to me to be the same as on the first list on the table of Exhibit N.

Q. Please also take a look at Exhibits 85 and 81, those are letters from Sidaco, addressed to Ghana Cocoa Board dated 25/02/2014, and do appear to be providing details of the product…on the second page of Exhibit N?

A. My lord on the face of Exhibit 81, it appears to be the same as the second Sidaco products on Exhibit N. Also Exhibit 85, the product listed therein appears to be the same as Sidaco first product listed on the table of Exhibit N.

Q. Please, finally Exhibit T is a letter from A3, dated 26/02/14 and on its face, it appears to be providing details on the supply of the product, listed the name of A3 on the table of the second page of Exhibit N. Is that correct sir?

A. Yes

Q. When you look at Exhibits 81, 83 85 & T, they all dated after the date of Exhibit N?

A. Yes, my lord.

Q. So clearly, the information provided in Exhibits 81, 83, 85 & T was not meant for the purposes of the writing of Exhibit N to the PPA?

A. Yes

Case adjourned to 28/03/2022 at 10:00 am for continuation.