Osafo Maafo summoned Scientists over lithovit report -Witness

Genevieve Baah Mante, head of Biochemistry Department of Ghana Standard Authority (GSA), says scientists from the Authority and the Chemistry Department of University of Ghana (UG) were hauled to Yaw Osafo Maafo’s office for producing conflicting test reports on the same product, lithovit fertiliser.

She said Mr. Maafo, the then Senior Minister, met them in the company of other officials from Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) to find out why the reports were different.
Mrs. Mante, while being led in evidence by Benson Nutsukpui, counsel for Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited in the ongoing cocoa trial, explained that the difference were as a result of the method used in sampling of the product, nature and methods of analysis.
Thus the three reports, two from GSA and one from the University of Ghana, said different things about the lithovit fertiliser

She told the Accra High Court, presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh on Wednesday, June 12, 2024 that at the meeting they spoke about the different methods used in the analysis, the way the sampling was done, the probable different batch numbers sent to all the three laboratories, the environmental conditions under which the tests were conducted.
She said the UG Chemistry Department was given powdery sample while the GSA was given liquid.

According to her, suggestions made to resolve the discrepancies arising from their analyses, by way of being granted the opportunity to COCOBOD warehouse to pick samples at random from the lot to run a second test was declined.
She added being allowed access to the warehouse to pick samples at random would have helped them develop a composite sample and select one method to be used for the analysis.

The witness further recommended that the samples could be flown outside Ghana to an accredited lab to be tested, but couldn’t testify whether it was adhered to.
Cross-examination
Q: Yesterday, I requested of you that you find out about the GS175 part 1. Did you find out about it?
A: Yes.

Q: Kindly tell this Court what is GS175 part 1.
A: The latest Ghana Standard Authority catalogue developed in 2019 does not have the part 1. It has the GS175 but not part 1 and the title is Water Quality – Specification for drinking water. I recall that the origin)al GS175 was made up of part 1, part 2 and part 3 and it corresponds to test methods, the specifications and another title which had been merged into the latest GS175: 2017.

Q: So the three parts that have been merged now is headed Water Quality-Specification for drinking water.
A: Yes.

Q: Look at Exhibit page, the page opened for you, where the results are. After the test methods, you have the specification. What is in the specification column?
A: Yes I have seen the heading Specification. The next column.

Q: What is the first entry under the specification?
A: The first entry is 19.7.

Q: Before the 19.7.
A: The next entry is GS175 part 1.

Q: What does that mean?
A: In our normal generation of test reports, the specifications in the standards are listed in this particular column. In case the specifications are supplied by the customer, it is the customer’s specification which are listed in this particular column.

Q: So quoting GS175 at the specification column means what in reports like this that are generated?
A: What it means is that the specifications in that particular standard should be listed here.

Q: So when you go to the first entry, calcium, you have specification 19.7. Do you have any idea where that 19.7 is coming from?
A: I have to cross check with the water standard before I can make any further comment on this.

Q: Further, you have magnesium specification 0.7. Again do you have any idea where that 0.7 is coming from?
A: No. I do not have any idea of where it is coming from.

Q: You have urea, 50 under the specification. Do you have any idea where it is coming from?
A: No.

Q: The standards under GS175, what products do they relate to?
A: They relate to drinking water.

Q: Looking at the report, we have the comment. Please tell the Court if you know. Line 2 says that “the sample cannot be classified as fungicide, pesticide or fertilizer. The strong smell of ammonia is due to the urea and its application on cocoa seedlings and plants should not be done”. Can you find the Ghana Standard Authority’s standard for fungicide under GS175?
A: No.

Q: Can you find the standard for pesticide under GS175?
A: I have to cross check that one.

Q: And can you find the standard for fertilizer under GS175?
A: No.

Q: From the results arrived at in the Quartey-Papafio test, would you be able to look at those results and reach the conclusion whether the product is a fertilizer or not by the Ghana Standard Authority standards?
A: No.

Q: You have told this Court and you told the police also that there are no standards for fertilizer which is to be used on cocoa at the Standards Board.
A: Yes. The GSA catalogue has only three standards on fertilizer.

Q: And you have them with you?
A: Yes.

Q: Can you show them to the Court?
A: Yes.

Q: Show them to the Court.
A: (Witness showed the three GSA standards catalogue to the Court).

Q: The Ghana Standards on fertilizer are; GS1127/2017. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: And GS118/2017. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: And also GS119/2017.
A: Yes. These were developed after June, 2017.

Q: Prior to June, 2017, what was the standard that was used by the Ghana Standard Authority on fertilizer.
A: We did not have any Ghana standard on fertilizer.

Q: Prior to 2017, what was the reference Standard for testing fertilizer?
A: For testing, there were a number of international standard for testing but when it comes to making remarks, we do not have any specification to compare the sample with.

Q: Explain this to me. How do you arrive at determining that the sample is a fertilizer?
A: The main components of a fertilizer are nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. Then you have some other nutrients like calcium, magnesium and sulphur then you can have some trace elements like cobalt, iron, zinc, manganese.

Q: Quartey-Papafio stated in his remarks, page 120 of Exhibit H. “The sample has been adulterated and did not meet the specifications of the standard”. The first question there is, when the report says the sample has been adulterated, do you understand it?
A: I understand when a sample has been adulterated but in this case I don’t understand.

Q: It also said that the sample did not meet the specification of the standard. As the head of the Material Science Department, do you know the standard that is being referred to?
A: No.

Q: There is a definite pronouncement in the very last line. It says “it is harmful to humans, animals as well as hazardous to water”. Please tell this Court, do you know the basis of that finding?
A: No.

Q: And does GS175 provide the specifications for that finding?
A: No.

Q: Have you ever seen the gentleman standing, 2nd accused person?
A: No.

Q: When was the first time you saw him?
A: I recall October, 2022 when we were invited to this Court; that was the first time I saw him.

Q: Have you ever met him or anybody from Agricult whiles you were doing the testing for EOCO in 2017?
A: No. As part of the fulfilment of the impartiality clause in ISO 17025 when a staff receives samples from client, neither do you work on it nor generate a report as well as approve it. So the system does not allow anybody meeting a client to have a role to play in the work.

Q: You said after the report you had a first meeting in EOCO office.
A: Yes.

Q: For this specific meeting, can you remember the persons who were present if even you don’t know their names, the position and titles or where they were coming from?
A: I remember one Gyang and the retired police officer Amoah. I have forgotten his title.

Q: Any other person?
A: I think one Prosper.

Q: The people you met, do you know where they work?
A: They all work at EOCO.

Q: Have you ever heard of the name K. K. Amoah?
A: The head of EOCO was Amoah but I don’t know his initials.

Q: Is that the person you referred to as the retired police officer Amoah?
A: Yes.

Q: What did they want to know?
A: Amoah wanted to know why GSA produced two conflicting reports. That was my first time of seeing Quartey-Papafio’s report at EOCO so I could not comment on his report.

Q: But did you explain your report to them?
A: I explained my report to them.

Q: Would you agree that the two reports are conflicting?
A: Yes I agree.

Q: Was any decision or conclusion arrived at in the EOCO meeting in the face of the two conflicting reports?
A: No. We were asked to go downstairs to write a statement.

Q: Did you write a statement?
A: Yes.

Q: Kindly tell this Court how long after this initial meeting were you summoned to the second meeting?
A: I cannot remember.

Q: But this second meeting you said took place in the office of Honourable OsarfoMarfo.
A: Yes.

Q: Please where is this office located?
A: Somewhere around the Passport office at Ridge.

Q: Take your mind back to that meeting and if you can remember the persons who were there and the institutions they came from?
A: I cannot remember the names but I remember officials from COCOBOD and two people from the chemistry department of the University of Ghana.

Q: Were the officials of EOCO present?
A: Yes.

Q: Any other person that you can remember?
A: No.

Q: Who did the team meet in the office?
A: We met Honourable OsafoMarfo.

Q: Slowly explain to this Court. What transpired at that meeting?
A: He wanted to find out why the reports were different. Three reports, two from GSA, one from the University of Ghana. So we spoke about the different methods used in the analysis. The way the sampling was done, the probable different batch numbers sent to all the three labs, the environmental conditions under which the tests were conducted.

Q: When you say the way the sampling was done, what does that mean?
A: We were made aware that it was quite a voluminous amount of samples so picking just one was not representative of the whole lot so we requested that we are allowed to enter the warehouse of Cocobod and pick at random as well as develop a composite sample that is mixing them up and then we would come together and discuss all the analysts and select one method to be used for the analysis.

Q: You have in your answers in relation to what transpired in Honourable Osafo Marfo’s office always said “we”, who are the “we”?
A: All the analysts present.

Q: Were you alone from the Ghana Standard Authority?
A: Ms Fiona Gyamfi was there, Mr. Peter Quartey-Papafio was also there.

Q: Do you know the analyst from the University of Ghana?
A: They were two but I don’t remember their names. We also recommended that the samples could be flown outside Ghana to an accredited lab to be tested.

Q: Again who are the “we” who said this?
A: The representatives from the University of Ghana.

Q: You said to this Court a few minutes ago that there were some officials from COCOBOD at the Osafo Marfo’s meeting. Can you remember the number?
A: No.

Q: Did you get to know the name of any of them?
A: No. There was an introduction but I don’t remember the names.

Q: What did the meeting say to the suggestion of the analyst that the analyst would be given an opportunity to do a confirmatory test?
A: We recommended this to them. That is all I can say.

Q: What did the meeting say to the analyst recommendation that the sample could also be flown outside for a confirmatory test?
A: We gave them the suggestion. I don’t remember anything said.

Q: Were you the analysts given any instructions in respect of the confirmatory test?
A: No.

Q: Was any further sample delivered to Standards Authority for the confirmatory testing?
A: No. I am not aware.

Q: Did you and your analysts at Standards Authority ever get to conduct the confirmatory test that you suggested?
A: No. I am not aware of any such test.

Q: Was Standards Authority contacted by EOCO to conduct a confirmatory test to resolve the conflict?

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

Q: Did the police CID contact Ghana Standard Authority to conduct the confirmatory test that the analysts suggested?
A: Not in my department.

Q: After the joint meeting of the analysts, Cocobod’s staff and EOCO at the office of Honourable Osafo Marfo, did Ghana Standard Authority conduct any further testing in this matter to your knowledge?
A: No. I am not aware of any further testing.

Q: And you as Mrs.Mantey, were you ever invited to any meeting in respect of any further testing in your capacity as the head of the Material Science Department?
A: No.

Q: Look at Exhibit H, page 105 contains the Quartey-Papafio report as we have been discussing. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: Look at page 110. That is the university of Ghana report. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: The university of Ghana report was a total different approach to testing. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: They reviewed the literature on lithovit. That is correct?
A: Yes.

Q: You said at the meeting at the Osafo Marfo’s office, the analysts who prepared the three reports discussed them.
?
A: Yes.

Q: Look at page 110, the university of Ghana report. It starts from page 110 and ends at page 120, if you look at that report, where did they provide the analysis of the sample they analysed?
A: I cannot answer.

Q: You have seen the Quartey-Papafio’s report and that of university of Ghana. Take a cursory look at Exhibit H and see if you can find your report Exhibit 133 there.
A: No.

Q: Look at Exhibit H page 117 which is page 5 of the university of Ghana report. 4.1.2 Headed identification of substance and chemical composition. Have you seen it?
A: Yes.

Q: They said “the chemical parameters were assessed after sample was subjected to hot acid digestion and analysed with atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS). Please explain to this Court what AAS means?
A: It is an equipment that uses light to measure the concentration of elements in solutions based on the wavelength.

Q: All I want to find out is, the range that would be produced from the AAS test, are they on the Ghana Standard Authority standards?
A: I cannot tell because every machine has its sensitivity so it depends on sensitivity of their machine.

Q: Was any particular standard agreed amongst the analysts for future test of fertilizers?
A: No.

Q: Please go to page 8 of the university of Ghana report and as contained in Exhibit H, the conclusion. The last two lines. “Chemically the material is composed of calcium carbonate (3. 22%) magnesium carbonate (0.48%) as well as other trace element? Have you seen it?
A: Yes.

Q: All I want you to tell this Court is go back, all the three of you did not agree on all the nutrient and trace elements in all the three tests.
A: Yes.

Q: From the Exhibit H and 133, it is true that the results on all the elements and nutrient were different. That is also true.
A: Yes. The samples are very different. GSA received a liquid sample but I see a powdery sample for university of Ghana, meaning they are very different samples.

Q: The University of Ghana got to the conclusion that “although the material is identified to be lithovit, its application on cocoa farms from nursery, growth and yield stage remains experimental because there is currently no evidence in literature for lithovit application on cocoa plants”. That is there?
A: Yes.

Q: Please explain to this Court what that means to the ordinary man.
A: I cannot comment on it.

Q: I am not asking you for your comment. I am asking you to explain. Does it mean that the conclusion is based on the fact that they cannot find literature on the application of lithovit on cocoa? Is that what it means?
A: That is what they are saying.

Q: Throughout your years at Ghana Standard Authority, have you ever been requested to determine the suitability of any fertilizer on cocoa?
A: No.

Q: Please explain to this Court, has the Ghana Standard Authority to your knowledge ever worked on or determined the suitability of fertilizers for the use on cocoa for Cocobod?
A: No.

Q: In terms of determining the suitability of fertilizer on cocoa, are there any standards for Ghana Standard Authority that they have used in the years gone by?
A: I am not aware of any.

Q: Indeed, Ghana Standard Authority has never been involved in testing fertilizers for use on cocoa. That is correct?
A: Ghana Standard Authority has an office at the port so it is possible fertilizer has been sampled and analysed without us at the lab knowing that it is going to Cocobod because we sample fertilizer at the port and test but it is coded so we in the lab do not know the clients.

Q: Although you test all those samples you do not determine their suitability on cocoa?
A: No.

COUNSEL FOR 2ND AND 3RD ACCUSED: My lord that will be all for the witness.

Having considered the examination-in-chief as adduced by DW5/A2 and 3rd accused person, 1st accused and the prosecution will not require more than three hours to effectively cross-examine the witness DW5/A2 and A3.

Accordingly, counsel for and on behalf of A1 and the prosecution are each given three hours to cross-examine the witness DW5/A2 and 3rd accused person, otherwise described by this Court.

Cross-examination of DW5/A2/A3 by Samuel Codjoe

Q: Amongst the mandate of the Ghana Standard Authority is to conduct test on food standards and for that you have a food laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: You also have the mandate to conduct standards on drinks and for that you have a drink laboratory.

A: Yes.

Q: And also you have mycotoxins and histamine?
A: Yes.

Q: For which you have a mycotoxin and histamine laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then your mandate also extends to metallic contaminants for which you have a metallic contaminants laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: You also have the mandate to conduct test in pesticide residue?
A: Yes.

Q: For which you have pesticides residue laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct test on standard for forensic on which you have a forensic laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct standards on drugs for which you have a drugs laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct test on the standards for cosmetics?
A: Yes

Q: And for which you have a cosmetic laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: And you have a mandate to conduct test on the standard for histopathology.
A: Yes.

Q: For which you have the histopathology lab?
A: Yes.

Q: You have the mandate to conduct test for water for which you have a water laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct test on chemicals for which you have the general chemistry laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct testing on civil works for which you have the civil laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: You have the mandate to conduct test on petroleum for which you have the petroleum laboratory.
A: Yes.

Q: You have the mandate to conduct test on standard for precious metal for which you have precious metal laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: Then you have the mandate to conduct and or determine pattern approval of measuring instrument?
A: Yes

Q: You have the mandate to conduct test on polymer and plastics for which you have the polymer and plastics laboratory?
A: Yes.

Q: You also have the mandate to conduct standards for electrical and electronic for which you have the electrical and electronic laboratory.
A: Yes.

Q: It is therefore a truism that the Ghana Standard Authority is the appropriate body to determine standards of product in Ghana?
A: Yes.

 

BY COURT: Cross-examination of DW5/A2 and 3rd accused person by counsel for 1st accused person to continue and the witness is temporarily discharged. The case is adjourned to 13th June, 2024 at 10:30am.