By Adnan Adams Mohammed,
Media Advisor
A formal rebuttal has been issued in response to a petition seeking to block the confirmation of Mr. Ato Boateng as the Deputy Chief Executive (Finance & Administration) of the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD).
The rebuttal characterizes the petition, submitted by Hon. Vincent Ekow Assafuah, Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, as “much ado about nothing” and lacking substantive evidence of wrongdoing.
The controversy stems from a petition dated February 25, 2026, which called for Mr. Boateng to step aside due to his former role as CEO of Atlas Commodities Limited. However, supporters of the appointment argue the claims are based on “speculative leaps” rather than factual regulatory breaches.
Lack of Evidence of Conflict
The core of the rebuttal addresses the “baseless nature” of the allegations regarding Mr. Boateng’s professional history. Key points raised include:
No Current Ownership: The petition does not demonstrate that Mr. Boateng currently holds any shares in Atlas Commodities Limited.
Absence of Control: There is no evidence that he exercises executive control or decision-making power over the private company while serving in his official capacity at COCOBOD.
No Policy Interference: The rebuttal notes that the petition fails to show Mr. Boateng has participated in any official COCOBOD decisions that specifically benefit Atlas Commodities.
Financial Integrity: No instances of financial benefit accruing to Mr. Boateng from the operations of his former employer have been cited.
Constitutional and Professional Standards
While the original petition cited Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution regarding the conduct of public officers, the rebuttal argues this is a fundamental misinterpretation of the law.
The response clarifies that a legal conflict of interest requires a “real and present” personal interest, whereas the petition relies solely on past employment. It further asserts that “professional history is not a crime,” noting that disqualifying individuals based on prior sector experience would deprive the public service of essential expertise.
”To suggest that a person’s professional background constitutes a conflict of interest is to suggest that the public service should be devoid of industry experts. This is not only illogical but a disservice to the state.”
Addressing Allegations of Interference
The rebuttal also hits back at claims that Mr. Boateng attempted to interfere with records at the Registrar General’s Department (RGD) on February 20, 2026. It labels these claims a “distortion of facts,” arguing it is illogical to suggest an “abuse of office” at COCOBOD based on alleged actions at an entirely separate institution where Mr. Boateng holds no authority.
Conclusion
The statement concludes that the move to block the appointment is an attempt to stall a qualified candidate based on conjecture rather than a genuine pursuit of transparency.
It urges the Governing Board of COCOBOD and the general public to dismiss the petition due to its lack of proof regarding any current regulatory or constitutional breaches.
