Agriculture Spending Under Scrutiny as Civil Society Group Challenges Kwagrue’s Corruption Claims

Monrovia, Liberia: The Ministry of Agriculture has pushed back against allegations raised by Nimba County District #5 Representative Kortor S. Kwagrue over the purchase of cattle, fertilizer and rice, as questions continue over how agricultural resources are being managed and distributed.

The lawmaker has questioned the cost and condition of cattle purchased for Grand Kru County, the price of fertilizer, the source of rice supplied through the Ministry and alleged links between senior officials and farming cooperatives.

In a response to the allegations, the Ministry’s defenders said some of the figures cited by Kwagrue had been misunderstood. They also denied that senior officials used cooperatives or personal farms to benefit improperly from agricultural support.

The dispute has placed renewed attention on the need for procurement records, delivery documents and beneficiary lists to show how public funds were spent and who received the support.

Cattle purchase

The response says 200 cattle were procured at US$930 each, including the cost of importing and transporting them to Grand Kru County. That puts the total purchase cost at US$186,000.

It disputes Kwagrue’s reported claim that the cattle were purchased for US$1,000 each and were old. According to the response, the animals are young cows and bulls suitable for breeding.

However, the response does not state how many of the cattle have been delivered or identify the farmers and communities that received them.

The purchase contract, delivery records and veterinary assessments would help establish the number delivered, their condition and whether they met the requirements of the agreement.

Fertilizer prices

The response also challenges the lawmaker’s reported figures for fertilizer, saying the prices were quoted per metric ton rather than per bag.

It puts the price of NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer at US$760 per metric ton and Urea 46% at US$700 per metric ton. A metric ton contains twenty 50-kilogram bags, making the stated cost US$38 per bag for NPK and US$35 per bag for Urea.

The calculation is correct if the quoted prices were per metric ton. Procurement documents would establish the units used, the quantities purchased and any additional charges.

Questions also remain about how the suppliers were selected, whether the prices were competitive and where the fertilizer was distributed.

Rice and cooperative allegations

The response denies an allegation attributed to Kwagrue that imported rice was repackaged and presented as locally produced rice.

It says five vendors supply locally grown rice to the Ministry and names Mohamed Kamara, the producer of Foya Queen rice in Lofa County, as one supplier. The response does not identify the other four vendors or state how much rice each supplied.

It also rejects allegations that senior Ministry officials established cooperatives through relatives or associates to divert public resources. The response says no agricultural support was directed to the personal farms of senior management officials.

Cooperative registration documents, beneficiary lists and distribution records would help establish whether any officials or their associates received improper benefits.

Oversight and accountability

The response argues that questions about the location of Ministry farms misunderstand the institution’s role. It says the Ministry supports agricultural production through policies, technical services, inputs and assistance to farmers and cooperatives, rather than necessarily operating farms itself.

It calls on Kwagrue to bring his concerns before the House of Representatives and request documents from the Ministry. It also suggests that he may have been influenced by people with political or personal interests, but provides no evidence for that claim.

The lawmaker’s original statement and the procurement records were not included in the material reviewed for this story. The release of those records, along with details of the cattle, fertilizer and rice distribution, would allow lawmakers and the public to assess the allegations and the response.

Civil Society Group Challenges Kwagrue’s Agriculture Claims as Procurement Questions Remain

The Civil Society Working Group of Liberia has rejected corruption allegations raised by Nimba County District #5 Representative Kortor S. Kwagrue against the Ministry of Agriculture, arguing that the lawmaker misread procurement figures and misunderstood the Ministry’s responsibilities.

The Group’s Executive Director, James Alpha Momo, disputed claims concerning cattle purchases, fertilizer prices, the source of rice supplied through the Ministry and alleged benefits to cooperatives linked to senior officials.

Momo said legislative oversight was necessary, but lawmakers must verify their information before accusing public officials of wrongdoing.

The Group’s intervention adds another voice to the dispute. Its explanations, however, do not independently settle the allegations. Contracts, invoices, delivery records and beneficiary lists remain central to establishing how the money was spent and whether the intended farmers received support.

US$186,000 Cattle Purchase

Momo challenged the allegation attributed to Kwagrue that the Ministry bought 200 old cattle at US$1,000 each.

According to him, the procurement cost was US$930 per animal, bringing the total to US$186,000. He said that amount covered importing the cattle and transporting them to Grand Kru County.

He also disputed the description of the animals as old, saying they were young cows and bulls suitable for breeding.

The Group’s account leaves questions about delivery and distribution unanswered. It did not specify how many animals had arrived, identify the recipients or provide veterinary findings establishing their age and condition.

Those details would help determine whether the cattle supplied met the contract requirements.

Fertilizer Figures Challenged

On fertilizer, Momo said Kwagrue confused the cost of a metric ton with the cost of a single 50-kilogram bag.

The Group puts the price of NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer at US$760 per metric ton and Urea 46% at US$700 per metric ton.

Since a metric ton contains twenty 50-kilogram bags, those prices work out to US$38 per bag for NPK and US$35 for Urea.

Momo argued that a misreading of the units could not reasonably be presented as proof of corruption.

The arithmetic supports the Group’s explanation if the procurement prices were quoted per metric ton. The contracts and invoices would establish that point, along with the quantities purchased and any additional charges.

Whether the prices were competitive, how suppliers were selected and where the fertilizer was distributed are separate questions that also require records.

Rice Suppliers and Cooperative Claims

The Working Group also rejected the allegation that imported rice was repackaged and presented as locally produced rice.

Momo said the Ministry purchases locally grown rice through five suppliers. He identified Mohamed Kamara, producer of Foya Queen rice in Foya, Lofa County, as one of them.

The Group did not name the remaining four suppliers or state how much rice each supplied. Supplier contracts and purchase records would help establish the origin, quantity and cost of the rice.

On allegations that senior officials used relatives and associates to establish cooperatives and divert resources, Momo said there was no evidence supporting the accusation.

He maintained that no cooperative had been established by senior management for that purpose and that no agricultural support had been directed to their personal farms.

Momo added that some officials had been involved in farming before entering government, arguing that their agricultural interests alone did not establish wrongdoing.

That distinction does not remove the need to examine any potential conflicts of interest. Cooperative registration records, beneficiary lists and distribution reports would help establish whether officials or their associates received preferential treatment.

Dispute Over the Ministry’s Role

Momo also took issue with Kwagrue’s reported demands to identify farms owned by the Ministry.

He said the institution’s responsibilities include agricultural policy, technical assistance, support to farmers and cooperatives, access to inputs and the promotion of mechanization.

In the Group’s view, the Ministry should be judged by the support it provides to agricultural production rather than by how many farms it operates.

The explanation addresses the Ministry’s role, but does not resolve questions about the management of particular purchases or the distribution of supplies.

Call for Legislative Examination

The Working Group urged Kwagrue to take any evidence before the House of Representatives and seek a formal examination of the transactions.

Momo said the Ministry could be required to produce procurement contracts, payment records, delivery documents and distribution reports.

He also questioned whether individuals with personal interests were influencing the lawmaker. No evidence was presented to support that suggestion.

Kwagrue’s original statement and the underlying procurement records were not included in the material reviewed for this report. His allegations, as described in the responses, remain disputed.

A legislative examination of the records could test both the lawmaker’s accusations and the explanations offered in defense of the Ministry, including the cost of the purchases, the condition of supplies delivered and the identities of those who benefited.