The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has strongly criticised the Ghana Cocoa Board Bill, 2026, describing it as a necessary reform undermined by a flawed and rushed process that risks harming the very farmers it seeks to protect.

Addressing a news conference in Accra on August 9, 2026, under the auspices of the NPP Policy Secretariat, Dr Isaac Yaw Opoku said the party did not oppose the replacement of the outdated PNDCL 81.

He said the Bill supports key objectives such as traceability, value addition and a guaranteed minimum share of the cocoa price for farmers. However, Dr Opoku, who is also the Ranking Member on the Food and Agriculture Committee of Parliament, condemned the manner in which the Bill was passed, arguing that several of its provisions raise concerns.

“A good cause has been undone by a bad process,” he stated.

Why the Bill matters

The NPP emphasised that no law passed this year affects more Ghanaians than the legislation governing the cocoa sector.

Dr Opoku pointed out that the cocoa sector supports about 800,000 farming families and roughly three million people, generating around $2 billion each season.

However, he said the industry is already under strain. According to Dr Opoku, production has dropped 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.

He added that about 90,000 hectares still require rehabilitation due to swollen shoot disease.

“The cost of getting this wrong will not be paid in Accra, but in Sefwi Wiawso, Offinso, Goaso and Enchi,” the NPP warned.

Rushed process without farmers

The Bill was laid on July 28 and passed within the same week under a Certificate of Urgency.

During that short period, Parliament repealed PNDCL 81 in its entirety, restructured the industry, created a tribunal and introduced new criminal offences.

While the NPP acknowledged that the use of a Certificate of Urgency is not unconstitutional, it argued that its application must be proportionate. The party said a seasonal pricing window that opens every September cannot justify rushing such a permanent and far-reaching law.

The party also dismissed claims that extensive consultations had taken place.

“No engagement report was laid before the joint committee. Neither of the national cocoa farmer associations was consulted. Formal concerns raised by LICOBAG were ignored, and the Cocoa Hauliers Association was not consulted at all.

“Furthermore, the final 2026 Bill differed materially from the 2025 version previously reviewed in committee, meaning Members of Parliament passed a text that stakeholders had never seen.

“A law made for cocoa farmers, without cocoa farmers, is not reform. It is imposition,” the NPP declared.

Key provisions under fire

The NPP highlighted several clauses it believes require urgent review.

Clause 4 – Mandate of COCOBOD

While welcoming the restriction of COCOBOD’s core functions under Clause 4(a), the NPP raised concerns about Clause 4(b), which allows the Board to take on additional responsibilities with only ministerial approval.

The party argued that this creates a loophole that undermines the intended restriction.

Any expansion of COCOBOD’s mandate, it said, should require an Act of Parliament.

Clause 57 – Producer Price Formula

The statutory floor of not less than 70 per cent of the Gross Free On Board (FOB) price is welcome in principle. However, the NPP raised concerns about the shift from “world market price”, used in earlier drafts, to “realised Gross FOB”.

According to the party, the latter is an internal calculation known only to COCOBOD, based on forward contracts fixed months or seasons earlier.

The NPP demanded that the computation, underlying contracts and workings of the pricing committee be published and independently audited each season so farmers can verify the figures before the producer price is announced.

Clause 59 – Licensing of external marketing

According to the opposition party, the inclusion of external marketing among licensable activities signals a possible move towards private exporters.

The NPP strongly opposed this, arguing that Ghana’s strength lies in selling as a single seller through the Cocoa Marketing Company (CMC).

Dr Opoku argued that fragmenting external marketing would weaken the country’s forward sales programme, price stabilisation, quality premium and ability to negotiate jointly with Côte d’Ivoire on initiatives such as the Living Income Differential.

Clause 81 – Restrictions on tree removal

The NPP said although the provision is intended to prevent cocoa farms from being converted into galamsey sites, the clause criminalises routine good husbandry practices.

“Farmers would need Board approval even to thin overcrowded trees, remove dead trees, or rogue swollen shoot-infected trees — a delay that could accelerate the spread of the disease across the 90,000 hectares already under rehabilitation,” the party noted.

It also observed that requiring approval to convert a cocoa farm to other uses places an unfair encumbrance on private property.

Clause 85 – Farmer and farm registration

The Bill makes it illegal for unregistered farmers to produce, buy or sell cocoa commercially. Yet registration is the responsibility of COCOBOD, not individual farmers.

With registration still incomplete — 792,954 farmers registered against an estimated 800,000 households — the clause could criminalise farmers for administrative failures beyond their control.

The NPP called for the provision to be deferred until the Minister certifies that registration is substantially complete.

Clause 106 – Local processing threshold

The NPP argued that the requirement for at least 50 per cent of beans produced to be processed locally is an ambitious target without a workable implementation plan.

“Ghana has grinding capacity of about 504,780 tonnes but currently processes only 210,000–220,000 tonnes annually.

“Achieving the 50 per cent target on a 650,000-tonne crop would require processing volumes far above recent performance.

“The critical question of pricing for beans sold to local processors remains unanswered, creating a potential conflict with the 70 per cent farmer price floor,” the party stated.

Credibility and broken trust

The NPP pointed to the mid-season producer price cut during the 2025/2026 season as evidence of why farmers cannot take government promises on trust.

The producer price was announced at GH¢51,660 per tonne in August 2025 but reduced to GH¢41,392 in February 2026 — a 28.6 per cent cut after farmers had already committed resources.

A farmer in Sefwi Wiawso, the statement noted, lost GH¢1,038 on every bag.

The party pledged that the next NPP administration under Dr Mahamudu Bawumia would not cut an announced producer price mid-season and would demand full transparency in the pricing formula every season.

Calls to action

The NPP called on President John Dramani Mahama to withhold assent and return the Bill for broader consultation.

It also urged Parliament, if the Bill is reconsidered, to:

Restrict any expansion of COCOBOD’s mandate to an Act of Parliament.

Require the publication and independent audit of the realised Gross FOB each season.

Confirm that external marketing remains exclusively with the Cocoa Marketing Company.

Exempt routine agronomic practices from the tree-removal restrictions. Defer the criminalisation of unregistered farmers until registration is complete.

Clarify the pricing basis for beans supplied to local processors.

The party further invited LICOBAG, farmer associations, hauliers and processors to place their positions on the public record.

“Ghana’s cocoa industry was built over a century by families who planted trees that would not bear for five years. They are owed better than a law made in haste, in their absence,” the NPP concluded.