The Member of Parliament for North Tongu Constituency, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, has questioned why Lamens Investments Africa Ltd was fined by the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) and admitted culpability by paying GH₵50,000 of the fine, despite claims by the Ministry of Education that the FDA approved the extension of the expiry date for Moshosho rice.
Given the current development, he has called for an independent investigation into the Ministry’s role in the scandal.
According to the Ministry’s Public Relations Officer, the FDA granted permission to extend the expiry date of the Moshosho rice from December 2023 to April 2024.
However, Ablakwa finds this assertion questionable, especially since Lamens Investments was fined GH₵100,000 for re-bagging the rice without authorization, altering its country of origin from India to Ghana, and omitting expiry dates from the labels.
Lamens’ part-payment of GH₵50,000 further indicates an admission of wrongdoing.
Ablakwa expressed his frustration in a Facebook post, suggesting that the Ministry of Education might have prioritized defending Lamens Investments over ensuring the safety and welfare of schoolchildren.
“Soon they will tell us they had another authorization from the FDA to change the origin of the rice from India to Ghana, and then an additional FDA authorization not to indicate expiry dates on the re-bagged rice,” he remarked sarcastically.
The controversy stems from allegations that Moshosho rice, imported from India, was improperly re-packaged and labelled before being distributed to schools. Evidence provided by the FDA indicates that the re-bagging process violated Ghana’s Public Health Act, 2012 (Act 851), which mandates accurate labelling of food products to ensure consumer safety.
Ablakwa has called for a credible and impartial investigation to begin with the Ministry of Education, arguing that the scandal undermines public trust and compromises the welfare of vulnerable schoolchildren.
“Under the Akufo-Addo/Bawumia administration, the Ministry of Education defends companies engaged in criminal ventures instead of defending vulnerable children placed under their care,” he stated.
