Appointment of DG at SN-SOSUCO, who misled the Council of Ministers?

Everything had to go very quickly as was apparently planned. On Wednesday, February 7, 2024, the Council of Ministers appoints Séraphin Dembélé to the position of new Director General of the Société Nouvelle-Société Sucrière de la Comoé (SN-SOSUCO). The next day, Thursday, February 8, the Secretary General informed the current Director General of this appointment and informed him that the handover will take place on Tuesday, February 13. The current Director General has only two working days to prepare the handover. He is even asked that all the handover documents be “taken in advance in order to allow this ceremony to take place on the date indicated”.
Except that on the same day (February 8, date of the letter from the Secretary General of the Ministry of Industrial Development, Trade, Crafts and Small and Medium Enterprises), the Chairman and CEO of SUCRE PARTICIPATION responded to the Minister and informed him that the appointment of the new DG cannot succeed and that consequently, the handover ceremony cannot take place. For what ? SUCRE PRODUCTION is still the majority holder of SN-SOSUCO shares. Therefore, the appointment of any Director General is his right. In other words, the Burkinabè State was content to denounce an agreement but has not, until now, taken any other measures to buy back the shares held by the majority shareholder and which were the subject of the denunciation.
Indeed, on October 25, 2023, the Council of Ministers denounced the agreement which binds the Burkinabè State to the majority partner SUCRE PARTICIPATION, majority owned by Industrial Promotion Services West Africa IPS (WA). Then, apparently nothing more. Even though a meeting “devoted in particular to the promotion of SN-SOSUCO” took place on January 29 and at the end of which “the representatives of IPS (WA) and SUCRE PARTICIPATION expressed our desire to put implement as soon as possible the frameworks and modalities for the orderly repurchase of our participation as this seems desired by the State, and in particular that an agreement is reached on the valuation of this entity”, no follow-up was given to the case.
So what does this mean? How could the Council of Ministers appoint a DG under such conditions? Why such haste when everything suggests that the majority shareholder is in a good position to return his shares to the State? Was the appointment of a new Director General the most urgent? The commissioning ceremony has been postponed to a later date. It’s all messy!
When we remember the appointment of the new Director General of ONEA which also caused a lot of ink and saliva to flow, there is reason for the government to take steps for the appointment of Directors General, in particular those of state companies. So as not to agree with those who think that it is about rewards and control.

Dabaoué Audrianne KANI