Q: In your work at the Ghana Standard Authority, you have had the occasion to conduct test on fertilizer standards. That is the position.

A: Yes.

Q: When it comes to the test of the fertilizer that the Standard Authority has worked on, the Standard authority would not know whether this fertilizer is going to be used on cocoa or not. That is the position.

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, Cocobod itself was part of the people or agencies which sent the lithovit fertilizer to Ghana Standard Authority for testing. That is the position. Is that not so?

A: I would not know because samples are taken at the reception so I would not know.

Q: Cast your mind back. At the meetings that you held, when your report came out, you had officials of Cocobod in that meetings specifically Honourable Yaw Osafo Marfo’s meeting.

A: They were not at EOCO but they were only at the Honourable Yaw Osafo Marfo’s meeting.

Q: It is not in doubt that Cocobod itself therefore agreed and or accepted the fact that the Ghana Standard Authority is a competent body to conduct test to determine a fertilizer.

A: Our laboratories are accredited so our test results are accepted worldwide.

Q: You know about CRIG which is the scientific division of Cocobod?

A: Yes.

Q: You know about the fact that CRIG also conducts tests on fertilizers?

A: No.

Q: Have you dealt with any of the scientists in CRIG?A: Yes. Some years ago when the EU wanted to ban cocoa from Ghana because of a mycotoxin called Ochratoxin A, I worked tirelessly with one Dr. Takrama of CRIG to stop this ban.Q: Can I therefore be right in suggesting to you that in terms of worldwide acceptance of lab results, the laboratories from Ghana Standard Authority have a superior acceptance rating than that of CRIG?

A: Yes because our laboratories are accredited.

Q: In fact, I am suggesting to you that it is because this is the position and even known to Cocobod that is why when they wanted a report on the test of lithovit, EOCO submitted the sample to the Ghana Standard Authority for testing.

A: Yes. As a third party independent conformity assessment body, it is our role to settle such cases.

Q:When the product i.e. lithovit, was first sent to the Ghana Standard Authority for testing, did you or your department have any role to do in the first test (Quartey-Papafio)

A: No I am not aware of any such role.

Q: Did you get to know the sample of fertilizer which was submitted to Ghana Standard Authority with respect to the first test (Quartey-Papafio)?A: No.

Q: With respect to the second test, I believe this was the container (Exhibit H H) that was submitted if you would remember.

A:It is a long time. I do not remember.

Q: Do you have the analyst hand book?

A: Yes

Q: Where is the analyst handbook?

A: It is in my bag here. (Witness referred to the analyst handbook). It says brown liquid suspension contained in a white plastic bottle.

Q: In the normal course of event when Mr. Quartey-Papafio does a test by way of a laboratory analysis, you are required to see this results.

A: No.

Q: It is because he is in a different department. That is the narcotics?

A: Yes.

Q: But it is common knowledge and a very basic one that if you want to test on whether a product is a fertilizer at the Ghana Standard Authority, you do not go to the narcotic department. Is it not the case?

A: Yes. The chemistry lab is responsible for testing fertilizers.

Q: And the reason why in testing a fertilizer you don’t go to the narcotic department is that their line of reporting, their test report will never get to the chemistry department which is the requisite department in charge of testing of fertilizer. That is the position.

A: Yes.

Q: Having worked at the Ghana Standard Authority, when there is an issue as to a particular product which is sent for testing, the identification of the sample is crucial.

A: It depends on the request from the client.

Q: As a scientist, you would agree with me that a product to be tested if not taken from proper custody would give a different result as a result of various factors some of which are storage together with other factors. Is that not the position?

A: Yes.

Q: Can you please list to this Court some factors which would result in a product or sample which is tested but which would result in wrong analysis?

A: Temperature, sunlight, packaging; these are the three that comes to mind.

Q: You would agree with me that if the product or sample is also expired or adulterated or tampered with, you would not have a proper analysis because of this vitiating factors.

A: Yes.

Q: When did you or your department become aware of the first test results by Quartey-Papafio with respect to the test on lithovit?

A: The first time was at the office of the head of EOCO.Q: Have a look at Exhibit H on page 105 which has the covering letter of the Ghana Standard Authority. This report was submitted on the 5th May, 2017 as you can see from the second page on the date of analysis

.A: Yes.

Q: And the sample was submitted to the narcotic lab on 21st April, 2017.

A: The sample was submitted to the drug, cosmetics and forensic lab on 21st April, 2017 and a report generated on 5th May, 2017.

Q: You will confirm again that the drugs, cosmetics and forensic lab is not the department for testing of fertilizers in Ghana Standard Authority.

A: Yes.

Q: You can confirm that in Exhibit 132, the EOCO letter which was sent to Ghana Standard Authority describes the packaging of the product and it says it is a white plastic bottle with a green lid containing a liquid substance with the name lithovit. Is that not it?

A: Yes.

Q:I would be right in suggesting to you that when Mr. Quartey-Papafio was given this product to test on whether it was fertilizer in April 2017, what he should have done was to have referred it to the competent department and not to have conducted the test himself in his division.

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, when the product came to your Material Science Department and your department conducted the test, was the cosmetic, drug and forensic division informed about this test?

A: I do not think so.

Q: So then it would be a truism that if a product for testing is not submitted to the proper department in the Ghana Standard Authority for testing, it is possible to have a wrong finding as happened in this case. That is one reason.

A: It is possible some discussion ensued between Quartey-Papafio and the officials of EOCO before he accepted to conduct the analysis because the report from Quartey-Papafio has only three parameters which does not represents the full spectrum of parameters to be analysed for fertilizers.

Q: It is possible that the reason why Quartey-Papafio’s report has only three parameters may be because that is what EOCO requested. That is the position.

A:I cannot tell.

Q:Cast your mind back. When you had the first meeting in the office of EOCO, the Ghana Standard Authority was informed about the existence of these two conflicting reports from your Authority.

A: Yes.

Q: At that meeting, was the GSA informed about the test conducted by the Chemistry Department of the University of Ghana which is in the Exhibit H and which is dated May, 2017?

A: No.

Q: But you can confirm from Exhibit H that as at that time, the University of Ghana chemistry department report which is dated 16th May, 2017was in existence and was in the custody of EOCO as can be seen in the forwarding letter from the University of Ghana.

A:Yes. I can see that from Exhibit H.

Q: At the EOCO meeting, cast your mind back. You had officials from EOCO, the Ghana Standard Authority together with some other persons at the meeting. If you can remember.

A: The EOCO meeting was just Ghana Standard Authority’s staff and EOCO staff.

Q:The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the two conflicting test and to come to a determination of which was right or proper and or explain why you had two conflicting reports from the same GSA.

A: Yes to explain why we have two conflicting reports from the same institution.

Q: The meeting did not come to a conclusion and or resolve the issue as to these two conflicting reports. Did it?

A: No it did not.

Q: But Mr. Quartey-Papafio and Janet Aidoo who conducted the first test would definitely have agreed and or accepted that the requisite department to conduct the test of this fertilizer was your department. That is the position.

A: Yes.

Q: At that meeting, if you remember, Mr. Quartey-Papafio and Janet Aidoo did not vouch for the integrity of the sample that they tested.

A: I do not remember.

Q: But you remember definitely that with respect to the sample you tested, EOCO together with the suppliers were involved in the picking of the samples that were sent to the GSA for testing.

A: I am not aware.

Q: Subsequent to this first meeting, another meeting took place to determine the conflicting results, this time together with the result from the University of Ghana, this time in the office of the Honourable Yaw Osafo Maafo.

A: Yes.

Q: At the Honourable Yaw Osafo Maafo’s office, it didn’t just have the staff of EOCO and the staff of GSA but this time it had other persons. If you can remember.

A: Yes.

Q: You had persons of Cocobod at the meeting.

A: Yes.

Q: You also had personnel of the Chemistry department of the University of Ghana.

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, Honourable Yaw Osafo Maafo was also at the meeting.

A: Yes.

Q: And in fact, officers from CRIG were at the meeting if you can remember. One was wearing African print shirt.

A: I cannot remember the African print.

Q: But at that meeting, the Cocobod officials, the EOCO officials, the GSA officials, the University of Ghana officials together with the other persons at the meeting were all aware of the three test reports i.e. the two test reports from the GSA together with the report from the Chemistry Department of the University of Ghana.

A: Yes.

Q: Minutes were taken at that meeting if you can remember.

A: I cannot remember.

Q: Who was the chairperson of the meeting and I believe it was Honourable Yaw Osafo Marfo?A: I think so.

Q:I believe you got to know of K. K. Amoah who was the then head of EOCO and he was at this meeting.

A: I don’t remember him at the meeting.