The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has called on President John Dramani Mahama to withhold assent to the Ghana Cocoa Board Bill, 2026, arguing that the legislation was passed under a Certificate of Urgency without adequate consultation with cocoa farmers and contains provisions that could undermine the interests of producers.
The NPP Policy Secretariat said it did not oppose reform of Ghana’s cocoa sector and accepted that the existing PNDCL 81 was overdue for replacement.
However, it said the process used to pass the new law and several of its provisions required urgent reconsideration.
According to the party, the cocoa industry supports about 800,000 farming families and three million Ghanaians and generates approximately US$2 billion in a season.
It said the sector was already facing serious challenges, with output falling from a peak of 1.047 million tonnes to about 650,000 tonnes, with a further 16 per cent decline projected for the next season.
It also cited about 90,000 hectares awaiting rehabilitation because of swollen shoot disease.
The party warned that mistakes in cocoa policy would ultimately be paid for by farming communities across the cocoa-growing regions.
“A good cause has been undone by a bad process,” the Policy Secretariat said.
Bill passed in days
The NPP’s principal objection is to the speed with which the Bill was passed.
It said the legislation was laid before Parliament on July 28 and passed within the same week under a Certificate of Urgency, resulting in the repeal of PNDCL 81, the re-legislation of the cocoa industry and the creation of a new tribunal and criminal offences within days.
The party acknowledged that the use of a Certificate of Urgency was not unconstitutional but questioned whether its use was proportionate to the circumstances.
It challenged the argument that the annual September cocoa pricing window justified rushing through legislation of such permanence.
The NPP also disputed claims of extensive stakeholder consultation, saying no consultation report by a consultant who allegedly toured the country was laid before the joint parliamentary committee.
It claimed that neither of the two national cocoa farmer associations was consulted, concerns raised by the Licensed Cocoa Buyers Association of Ghana (LICOBAG) were not incorporated and the Cocoa Hauliers Association was not consulted.
It further said the 2026 Bill differed materially from the 2025 version previously reviewed by parliamentary committees, meaning stakeholders had not had an opportunity to scrutinise the final text.
“A law made for cocoa farmers, without cocoa farmers, is not reform. It is imposition,” the party said.
COCOBOD mandate questioned
The NPP has also raised concerns about Clause 4, which defines the mandate of the Ghana Cocoa Board.
It welcomed Clause 4(a), which confines COCOBOD to functions including regulation, development, marketing, quality assurance, traceability, pricing and export of cocoa.
Its concern is with Clause 4(b), which allows COCOBOD to assume responsibilities belonging to another Ministry through an enactment or with the prior approval of the Minister.
The party argued that a restriction which could be lifted through ministerial approval was not a meaningful restriction.
It wants any expansion of COCOBOD’s mandate beyond the functions specified in the law to require an Act of Parliament.
Who verifies the 70% price?
One of the party’s strongest concerns is Clause 57, which sets the producer price at not less than 70 per cent of the Gross Free On Board (FOB) price realised by COCOBOD.
The NPP welcomed the statutory floor but questioned how the Gross FOB figure would be determined.
It said an earlier version referred to the world market price, which is observable on international commodity exchanges, while the enacted provision refers to the Gross FOB price actually realised by COCOBOD.
According to the party, the realised Gross FOB is an internal calculation involving contracts negotiated and fixed months or seasons earlier and may therefore be known with certainty only to COCOBOD.
It argued that tying the farmer’s entitlement to a figure producers cannot independently verify weakens the guarantee.
The NPP wants COCOBOD to publish the calculation and underlying data used to determine the realised Gross FOB every season, with the figures independently audited before producer prices are announced.
Its central question is: 70 per cent of what figure, and verified by whom?
External marketing under threat?
The party has also questioned Clause 59, which establishes categories of licences.
According to the NPP, virtually all activities listed are already undertaken by private operators, except external marketing, currently the preserve of the Cocoa Marketing Company (CMC).
It argued that including external marketing in the licensing framework could open the door to private exporters competing with CMC.
The NPP strongly opposed such a development, arguing that Ghana’s strength in the international cocoa market lies in its ability to operate as a single seller.
Centralised marketing through CMC, it said, supports the country’s forward sales programme, price stabilisation, quality premiums and collective negotiations with Côte d’Ivoire on cocoa pricing arrangements, including the Living Income Differential.
The party warned that fragmenting exports could weaken Ghana’s bargaining power.
It recalled that under Cocoa Sector Strategy I, an NDC administration had moved towards allowing qualifying Licensed Buying Companies, including Cashpro, to export 30 per cent of their purchases.
The initiative was halted by the Kufuor administration in 2001.
The NPP questioned whether Clause 59 represented the return of that policy through a licensing framework.
Clause 81 could criminalise farmers
The party’s concerns extend to Clause 81, which prohibits the destruction, uprooting, damaging or felling of cocoa trees except for rehabilitation approved by COCOBOD.
The NPP said it supported the protection of cocoa farms, particularly against illegal mining, but argued that the provision was too broad and could criminalise normal farming practices.
Farmers routinely remove trees to thin overcrowded farms, eliminate dead or moribund trees and control swollen shoot disease.
The party said requiring approval before such trees could be removed could delay disease control.
With about 90,000 hectares already awaiting rehabilitation, it warned that delays in removing infected trees could accelerate the spread of swollen shoot.
The NPP also objected to requiring farmers to obtain approval if they wanted to stop growing cocoa and use their land for another purpose.
It warned that the provision could create opportunities for arbitrary enforcement, harassment and extortion.
It wants tree removals carried out under published COCOBOD agronomic guidelines to be exempted, while approval should be required only when a registered cocoa farm is converted to non-cocoa use.
Registration backlog
Clause 85, requiring farmers and farms to be registered on the Cocoa Management System, is another area of concern.
The provision would prohibit commercial production, purchase or sale of cocoa unless both farmer and farm were registered.
The NPP said registration was important for traceability but argued that the provision could unfairly punish farmers for COCOBOD’s own registration backlog.
It said COCOBOD’s latest update showed about 792,954 farmers registered and 1.2 million hectares mapped, against an estimated 800,000 farming households and 1.27 million hectares under harvest.
The party said registration remained incomplete and depended on COCOBOD’s field operations.
A farmer who had not been reached by an enumerator, it argued, had no control over his or her registration status and should not be criminalised or prevented from selling cocoa legally.
The NPP therefore wants enforcement of the restriction deferred until the Minister certifies that registration is substantially complete.
50% processing target questioned
The NPP also questioned Clause 106, which requires local processing of not less than 50 per cent of beans produced.
The party said it supported domestic processing and value addition but argued that the target must be matched by economic realities.
According to the NPP, Ghana has grinding capacity of about 504,780 tonnes annually, but actual grindings average only 210,000 to 220,000 tonnes.
With production at approximately 650,000 tonnes, a 50 per cent requirement would mean processing about 325,000 tonnes locally — more than 100,000 tonnes above recent levels.
The party therefore argued that the problem was not simply factory capacity but the price at which processors could obtain cocoa.
It asked what price would apply to beans supplied to local processors and, if discounted, who would absorb the difference — COCOBOD, the Consolidated Fund or farmers.
The NPP warned that discounted domestic sales could reduce the realised Gross FOB used to calculate the farmer’s 70 per cent minimum share, potentially creating a conflict between the processing requirement and the farmer price guarantee.
Price cut raises credibility concerns
The Policy Secretariat also cited the recent cocoa producer price reduction as evidence of why farmers may be sceptical about statutory guarantees.
It recalled that the 2025/26 season opened in August 2025 at GH¢51,660 per tonne, announced as representing 70 per cent of a Gross FOB price of US$7,200.
The party said the price was subsequently reduced to GH¢41,392 per tonne on February 12, a 28.6 per cent reduction.
According to the NPP, farmers had already planted, sprayed and harvested based on the earlier price.
It said a farmer in Sefwi Wiawso consequently lost GH¢1,038 on every bag under the revised price.
The party said the experience demonstrated why farmers needed stronger guarantees that announced prices would be honoured.
It pledged that an NPP administration under Dr Mahamudu Bawumia would not reduce a producer price during a season after it had been announced.
“A price announced to the Ghanaian farmer will be a price honoured to the Ghanaian farmer,” it said.
NPP demands reconsideration
The NPP is asking President Mahama to withhold assent and return the Bill to Parliament for broader consultation.
It wants Clause 4(b) narrowed so that expansion of COCOBOD’s mandate requires legislation; publication and independent auditing of the realised Gross FOB price; confirmation that external marketing remains vested in CMC; amendments to Clause 81 to exempt tree removals undertaken under COCOBOD’s agronomic guidelines; and postponement of Clause 85(2) until registration is certified substantially complete.
It also wants Parliament to clearly establish the price basis for cocoa supplied to local processors.
The party has urged LICOBAG, farmer associations, cocoa hauliers and processors to publicly state their positions on the Bill.
The NPP reiterated that it supported reform, traceability, value addition and a guaranteed minimum share for farmers.
Its objection, it said, was to provisions that could criminalise normal farm management, punish farmers for an incomplete registration process, weaken Ghana’s centralised cocoa marketing structure and tie farmers’ income to a Gross FOB figure they cannot independently verify.
The party said Ghana’s cocoa industry had been built over more than a century by farming families who planted trees that took years to mature and deserved legislation developed with their participation.
It therefore wants the Bill returned, stakeholders consulted and the disputed provisions revised before the new legal framework for the cocoa industry takes effect.
“As it stands,” the party said, “major provisions in this new Cocoa Board law will hurt farmers.”
