Former Chief Executive Officer of COCOBOD, Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni, has accused the Akufo-Addo administration of unjust persecution, following the withdrawal of all charges against him in a long-standing corruption case.
Speaking to journalists after a Thanksgiving service, on Sunday, April 20, Dr. Opuni maintained his innocence and described the trial as politically motivated.
“I think that today…tell the whole world that God has delivered me from the hands of my enemies and the wicked who decided that for eight years, they were going to frustrate me. I was prosecuted for eight years and I kept praying. I knew that I was innocent,” he stated.
On January 28, 2025, an Accra High Court presided over by Justice Aboagye Tandoh announced that the Attorney-General, Dominic Ayine, had directed the withdrawal of all charges against Dr. Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo.
State Attorney Enam Loh Mensah informed the court of the Attorney-General’s instruction, and the State formally filed a notice of withdrawal.
Dr. Opuni and Seidu Agongo had been facing 27 charges, including defrauding by false pretences, wilfully causing financial loss to the state, money laundering, and corruption by a public officer.
The case, which began in 2018, centred on the procurement of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer supplied by Agongo’s company, Agricult Ghana Limited. Prosecutors claimed the fertiliser was substandard and unapproved for use, and that Dr. Opuni bypassed procurement protocols to facilitate the deal, allegedly causing financial loss to the state and harming cocoa farmers.Ghanaian fashion
Both Dr. Opuni and Mr. Agongo consistently pleaded not guilty and insisted on their innocence throughout the trial. They were each granted bail of GH₵300,000.
The trial became one of Ghana’s most high-profile legal battles, featuring numerous witnesses, including scientists, government officials, and cocoa farmers. It was marred by delays, changes in presiding judges, and procedural disputes, which fuelled criticism from observers and legal experts.
Some critics pointed to the trial as politically charged, arguing that it lacked impartiality and was aimed at damaging reputations rather than seeking justice.
