Dr. Stephen Opuni
An Accra High Court has heard that there is no ‘trace’ of literature at the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) or the Cocoa Research Institute Ghana (CRIG) on Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer, which is at the centre of the trial of Dr. Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo.
A scientist at CRIG, Dr. Alfred Arthur, who is the second prosecution witness, under cross-examination, indicated that all documents at the two institutions refer to the product as Lithovit Foliar Fertilizer instead of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer as being claimed by the accused persons.
The witness told the court that even Dr. Opuni who wrote the covering letter on the product himself did not refer to the product as Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer in any of the correspondence between COCOBOD and Agricult Ghana Limited, distributors of the controversial fertilizer.
His statement follows a question by Benson Nutsukpui, counsel for Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited. He wanted to know whether it was the evidence of the witness that CRIG since 2014 had never referred to the product as Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer.
“As I have indicated several times, the letter which was sent to COCOBOD and approved by the management of the COCOBOD and the covering letter signed by the then Chief Executive Officer Dr. Stephen Opuni referred to the product as Lithovit Foliar Fertilizer,” the witness insisted.
The lawyer then asked whether the various departments at COCOBOD since 2014 had never described the product as Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer.
“I’m not aware of those divisions and departments of COCOBOD. What is officially on record as literature on the test of the Lithovit – that is the description on the product, how it should be applied, when it should be applied-are all contained in the report approved by management of COCOBOD and the letter signed by the Chief Executive Dr. Stephen Opuni,” the witness replied.
There was a back and forth between the defence lawyer and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Yvonne Attakora-Obuobisa regarding the tendering of a report by an adhoc committee that investigated some missing documents which included correspondence between Agricult Ghana Limited and CRIG.
While Mr. Nutsukpui insisted that the document was vital to the defence of his client, the DPP maintained that Dr. Arthur is not the ‘proper person’ to tender the document through.
She said the witness is not the author of the report and there have not been any indications that the authors of the report are not available.
The trial judge, Justice Clemence Honyenugah, an Appeal Court judge, upheld the objection and rejected the report.
According to him, “I think that it will be unfair to tender a document through a witness who does not know anything about the document. It is also my opinion that documents filed before this court do not mean that they could be admitted without regards to the rules.
Hearing continues on March 4, 2019.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak