The Head of Public Affairs at the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), Jerome Kwame Sam, says Parliament identified and corrected a constitutional flaw in the new Cocoa Bill before it was passed.

According to him, an initial provision in the Bill would have required the Chief Executive of COCOBOD to give express permission even after a person had been granted a mining licence.

He said the provision was found to be inconsistent with the Constitution and the Minerals and Mining Act during Parliament’s scrutiny of the Bill.

“At first we had in there, whereby even if somebody should be granted a license to mine, the person needed the express permission of the chief executive, and we did find out that it was in contravention with what the constitution, as well as provisions in the Minerals and Mining Act,” he said.

Mr Sam explained that mineral deposits are vested in the President under the Constitution, while the relevant minister, acting on that authority, issues mining licences.

“Because minerals deposits are vested in what in the president. So if you pick the Minerals Act, the minister acting instead of the president issues the license. So that authority is being drawn from the president,” he said.

He argued that requiring an additional approval from the COCOBOD Chief Executive after a valid mining licence had been issued would therefore create a conflict with the constitutional framework.

“So if somebody has gone through the right process and has been issued a license, and then you say that an express permission would has to be granted by the chief executive of Coco Board, then it contradicts provisions in what in the constitution,” he said.

Mr Sam said the provision was subsequently addressed through Parliament’s legislative scrutiny process.

He stressed that the Bill was not drafted solely within COCOBOD but went through consultations with experts and Parliament’s legislative committee before being subjected to clause-by-clause examination.

“Apart from engaging experts for the draft of the bill, we had opportunity to also meet with the legislative committee in Parliament, where they also scrutinize the bill went to Parliament, where clause by clause, the fine lawyers in Parliament were all present,” he said.

He said Parliament made changes where necessary, including amendments and deletions of provisions that required correction.

“They expressed their views, their opinions, where there should be amendments, there were amendments, where there ought to be complete deletion or expunge. They did say, and all that,” he said.

His comments come amid continued criticism of the new Cocoa Bill by the Minority, which has raised concerns about aspects of the legislation.

Mr Sam dismissed the criticisms as unfounded, while insisting that the legislation is intended to protect cocoa farmers.

“There is absolutely nothing because look, this isn’t a bill that we sat at Cocoa House and drafted,” he said.

He added that “if you read the bill in Plano, you could see that the bill seeks to protect the interest of the cocoa farmer.”

Mr Sam said the legislation introduces several reforms that did not previously exist under the laws governing the cocoa sector.

“There are a number of reforms that have been introduced in the bill, which ab initio never existed in any of the laws that govern the sector,” he said.

He also maintained that Parliament’s scrutiny of the Bill should counter suggestions that lawmakers did not have sufficient opportunity to examine its provisions.

“So if Parliament indeed had not had the opportunity to scrutinize the bill, how would these things have been dealt with?” he asked.

The Cocoa Bill is now before President John Mahama for consideration after its passage by Parliament.