Plantain, Slaps And Silence: What Really Happened At Berekum-Senase And Why Did Everyone Watch?

A video reportedly circulating from Berekum-Senase in the Bono Region has raised questions far beyond the alleged theft of plantains. It shows an elderly man reportedly being confronted and subjected to several slaps after allegedly being caught taking plantains from a farm.

But beneath the shocking images lies a much bigger question:

When someone is suspected of stealing, where does justice end and public punishment begin?

And perhaps even more uncomfortable: Why did the people watching the incident allow the beating to continue?

A farming community where plantain matters

Senase is one of the settlements within the Berekum Municipality, an area where agriculture remains an important part of the local economy. Government agricultural information identifies plantain among the major crops cultivated in the municipality, alongside cassava, maize, cocoyam, cocoa and other crops.

Agriculture accounts for a substantial share of employment in the municipality, meaning that crops on a farm are not simply vegetation growing on someone's land. They represent labour, investment, food and income.

That context matters when examining an allegation of farm theft.

Yet it also makes the events captured on camera even more important to investigate carefully.

So, who is the man?
At the time of writing, credible publicly available reports have not established the man's full identity, occupation, age or detailed personal history.

The reports describe him as one of two elderly men who were allegedly caught taking plantains from a farm in the Berekum-Senase area. They were subsequently reportedly made to carry plantains on their heads and walk through parts of the community.

That distinction is important.
He may have been caught committing an offence. He may have admitted taking the plantains. Or there may be another explanation.

An allegation captured on video is not, by itself, the same thing as an established criminal finding.

Was he actually stealing?
This is one of the central unanswered questions.

The available reports say the men were allegedly caught stealing plantains from a farm. However, the reports do not provide the farm owner's detailed account, the quantity allegedly taken, evidence showing exactly where the plantains came from, or a police statement establishing the facts of the case.

So the responsible question is not simply:

“Was he a thief?”
It is:
“What evidence established that he was stealing, and who independently verified that evidence?”

If the plantains belonged to somebody else and the suspect was caught removing them without permission, that could constitute stealing.

But if ownership, permission, circumstances or the man's explanation were disputed, those matters would require investigation.

Who caught him?
Reports indicate that the men were apprehended after allegedly being found taking plantains from a farm. They were then reportedly taken around the community, with residents gathering to watch.

But the available reporting does not identify the person who first discovered them, nor does it establish whether that individual was the farm owner, a farm worker, a neighbour or another resident.

And that creates another question:
Who actually confronted the man, and what happened between the moment he was allegedly discovered and the moment the crowd gathered?

That missing part of the story could be crucial.

And who was the man doing the beating?
This is perhaps one of the most important unanswered questions.

The reports available publicly do not identify the individual who allegedly slapped the suspected thief.

More importantly, they do not establish whether the person administering the punishment was:

the farm owner;
a relative of the owner;
a community member;
someone who had witnessed the alleged theft;

or simply another person who joined the confrontation.

If the plantains belonged to the person doing the beating, that establishes a different factual relationship from a situation in which an unrelated person took it upon himself to punish the suspect.

Ownership of the plantains does not automatically answer the separate question of who had the authority to physically punish an alleged thief.

Was the matter reported to the police?
This is another major gap.
The reports available at the time of writing do not confirm that the alleged plantain theft was reported to the police, nor do they confirm whether the suspects were formally handed over to police. One report expressly states that it was not known whether the matter was subsequently reported to the police or whether the men were handed over for investigation.

That means claims circulating on social media about what happened afterward should be treated cautiously unless supported by an official statement.

The Ghana Police Service lists Senase under the Berekum policing structure in the Bono Region, so a formal investigation, if initiated, would ordinarily fall within that police structure.

But as of the information publicly available for this report, there is no verified police account establishing exactly what happened, whether an arrest was made, or whether anyone was charged.

What did the alleged thieves say?
This is another critical piece of information missing from the published reports.

There has been no verified public account establishing the man's explanation for taking the plantains.

Was it hunger?
Was he collecting food?
Did he believe he had permission?
Was he taking them for somebody else?
Was he a farm worker?
Or was he simply stealing?
We do not yet have a sufficiently reliable public account of his explanation to answer these questions.

And that is precisely why journalism should not turn an allegation into a conviction.

The bigger issue: the beating
Even if the plantains were genuinely stolen, another question remains:

Who gave anyone the right to beat the suspect?

The available reports describe the men being apprehended and paraded through the community.

The images reportedly circulating, however, have generated particular concern because of the apparent physical punishment.

There is an important distinction between apprehending a suspected offender and administering punishment.

A community may be angry about theft. Farmers may understandably be frustrated when crops they have worked hard to produce disappear from their farms.

But if a suspect is caught, the next question should be:

Why not hand him over to the police?
And what about the people who watched?
Perhaps the most disturbing question is not even about the alleged thief.

It is about the crowd.
What was going through the minds of the people standing around?

Did some believe he deserved the beating?

Did others disagree but remain silent?
Did anyone attempt to stop it?
Did anyone call the police?
Did anyone ask the alleged victim of the beating whether he was injured?

Or did the crowd simply become spectators because everyone assumed somebody else would intervene?

This is where the Berekum-Senase incident becomes a mirror for society.

When a crowd watches a person being beaten because he is accused of stealing, are they witnessing justice or witnessing punishment without trial?

What if the plantains really were stolen?

That question must also be taken seriously.

Farm theft is not harmless.
For a farmer who spends months clearing land, planting, weeding, protecting crops and waiting for harvest, repeatedly losing produce can represent a serious economic loss.

So society must also avoid romanticising theft simply because the item allegedly stolen was “only plantain.”

A plantain bunch has value because somebody invested time, land, labour and money to produce it.

If the allegation is proven, the victim deserves justice.

But justice should answer the crime without creating another crime.

The uncomfortable questions
This incident leaves a number of questions that deserve answers:

Who owns the farm?
Who first saw the man taking the plantains?

How many plantains were allegedly taken?

Was he caught in the farm or after leaving it?

Was there evidence that the plantains belonged to the complainant?

What explanation did the suspect give?
Was he searched?
Were the plantains recovered?
Who slapped him?
Was the person who slapped him the farm owner?

Why was he not immediately handed over to the police?

Was the incident reported to the Senase or Berekum Police?

If it was reported, what did the police do?

Were the alleged thieves arrested?
Were the people who allegedly assaulted them identified?

If the suspects were elderly, did anybody consider whether they required medical attention after the alleged assault?

And perhaps the biggest question:
If the alleged theft was serious enough to provoke punishment, why was the alleged assault not considered serious enough to stop?

That question goes beyond Berekum-Senase.

It speaks to a wider problem whenever communities become judge, jury and executioner sometimes within minutes of an accusation.

Justice must protect both sides
There are two potential victims in a case like this.

The first is the farmer if his crops were genuinely stolen.

The second could be the suspect if he was wrongly accused or unlawfully assaulted.

Protecting one does not require abandoning the other.

A functioning community should be capable of saying:

“If you stole, you must answer for it but we will not beat you.”

That is not weakness.
That is the difference between justice and revenge.

The real story may not be the plantains
The plantains may be worth money.
The alleged theft may deserve investigation.

The farmer, if there is a farmer who lost his produce, deserves to be heard.

The suspect deserves an opportunity to explain himself.

And anyone who assaulted him should also be subject to the appropriate legal process if the facts establish that an offence occurred.

But the most important lesson from the Berekum-Senase incident may be what happened around the alleged theft.

A crowd watched.
A man was reportedly slapped.
People recorded or observed the spectacle.

And the unanswered question remains:
At what point did a community that was supposedly protecting someone's property stop protecting the dignity and safety of another human being?

Until the police, eyewitnesses, the farm owner and the people directly involved provide verifiable accounts, the public should resist declaring anyone guilty beyond what the evidence establishes.

Because if Ghana wants communities governed by law, the answer to alleged lawlessness cannot simply be another form of lawlessness.

By:
Patrick Belebang Yagsori
0240292413
[email protected]