The Director of Research, Monitoring and Evaluation at COCOBOD has countered the prosecution's attempt to attribute fluctuations in cocoa yields solely to the use of specific fertilisers, citing various factors influencing cocoa production.

A former Executive Director of the Cocoa Health and Extension Division (CHED) of COCOBOD, Dr Francis Baah, testifying in the trial of former COCOBOD Chief Executive Dr Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo, emphasized that cocoa yields can vary due to multiple factors, including weather conditions, farming practices, and fertiliser usage.

During the trial, Dr Baah dismissed the notion of any single fertiliser being solely responsible for changes in cocoa production, clarifying that COCOBOD procures and utilises multiple fertilisers each season.

In response to questions from counsel for Seidu Agongo, Dr Baah stressed the need for comprehensive studies before attributing cocoa yield changes to specific fertilisers. "Would your Monitoring & Evaluation Department blame any particular fertiliser for the rise, fall and or stagnation of cocoa production in any particular production year from 2013/14 till date?" he was asked.His response: "No! Unless there is a study or report to identify the culprit."

He also highlighted the complex nature of cocoa production, emphasizing the role of various environmental and management factors.

Regarding the fluctuation in cocoa yields over recent years, Dr Baah reiterated that blaming any individual or fertiliser for these changes would be oversimplifying a complex situation.

Dr Baah's testimony sheds light on the intricate dynamics of cocoa production, challenging the prosecution's singular focus on fertiliser usage.

The trial proceedings will resume at the Accra High Court on April 8, 2024.Below is a transcript of an except of the cross according to theheraldghana.com

Q. In 2021, the yield jumped to 1,047,384.94; that is correct?

A. That is correct

Q. The following year, 20211/2022, it fell by almost 40% to 683,268.94; that is correct?

A. That is correct

Q. Would it be right for anybody sitting anywhere to say that it was as a result of fertilisers that were bought by your chief executive in 2021/2022?

A. That would not be the case; it is a combination of [a] myriad of factors.

Q. Please explain to this honourable court why your chief executive for that year should not be blamed for the fall from 1,047,384.94 to 683,268.94.

A. I would not blame my chief executive because he does not have any control over the elements and factors that determine production, including the world market price.

Q. Will you attribute the fall in production from the 2020–2021 cocoa season to the 2021–2022 cocoa season to any fertiliser procured under the supervision of your Chief Executive at the time?

A. I will not. The changes or the vagaries in production figures is impinged on, as I have explained before, by a basket of factors.

Q. 2022/2023, it fell further to 656,139.87; that is true?

A. That is true

Q. Who do you blame for that?

A. I am not in the position to blame anybody

Q. Which fertiliser do you blame for that?

A. I blame no input.

Q. When you take out the production of 2022/2023, which is 656,139.87, from the production of 2016/2017, which is 969,510.69, you will get 313,370.82 metric tonnes; that is correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Tell this honourable court, as far as you are aware, has anybody been held responsible for the two years of 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 for the production of cocoa?

A. I don't know of anybody being held responsible.

Q. Would it be appropriate for the managers of COCOBOD for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 to be held responsible for [the] fall in production when you yourself have said that production is a result of a basket of issues and that no agronomy practice, husbandry, or management can determine the production?

A. I do not think it would be appropriate unless there is clear evidence of dereliction of duties on the part of any staff.

Q. Can any particular fertiliser or chemical be held responsible for the fall that we have seen in 2021/2022 and 2022/2023?

A. I do not think so.