Sucrose is actually not very sensit

Sucrose is actually not very sensitive to humidity and will only begin to absorb moisture at higher relative humidities. Only a few relative humidity levels were selected in the above experiment and I recall from other experiments that sucrose will absorb moisture around the 81% humidity level but more slowly. In any case, this shows that at high relative humidity and around 86°F (which is 30°C), up to 50% moisture is accrued. At 30°C, 1g of water can dissolve 2.19g of sucrose, so this would be more than sufficient to completely dissolve exposed sugar, hence a liquid sugar solution would form readily. This effect takes 7 days and there were 20 days actual offloading with a further 14 day hiatus. Although there would not be sufficiently high humidity all the time, according to weather data, it was very humid for a considerable portion of the day during the offloading period. Therefore in my view a considerable amount of deliquescence will have occurred and would have a high likelihood to be the source of the liquid that was observed.
The surface-wetted bags were most likely caused by the spilled sugar from torn bags absorbing moisture and forming a liquid sugar solution. While this would easily penetrate the woven polypropylene outer, it would not normally penetrate the inner layer unless there was some breach. All the bags I saw in the warehouse with the sugar solution on the outside seemed normal inside. Such bags would be reasonably mitigated by simple cleaning or rebagging if very bad.
Small lumps next to stitching are characteristic of sugar exposed to high humidity. The sugar will absorb moisture but very little through the restricted gap of the stitching. Whilst not ideal, this is typically a small amount of damage and if absolutely necessary could have been screened and rebagged at a modest outlay.
Completely wetted bags could only realistically occur if standing in liquid at the bottom of the stow where the sugar solution accrued at the tank top level would be able to flood the bag via the stitching or breaches in the polypropylene inner. I cannot envisage this could have occurred higher in the where there could be no standing liquid and I expect SGS might have mistaken surface wetted and internally caked bags for internally wetted bags. Wetted bags would not be usable for normal human consumption but might have been used for technical purposes, such as ethanol production.
4.0 Concluding remarks
Whilst I am confident to rely on Budd’s and the master’s observations along with the photographic and other evidence, I think it would be useful for me to see at least some of the retained bag contents in the warehouse so I can provide a definitive account in a final report.
What I consider is a more important point for the current situation is regarding the SGS tally. I am not certain if this has been addressed but if not you may want to consider obtaining some legal advice on how much pressure can be borne on cargo interests as soon as possible to release the vessel at a lower guarantee given the clear illogical and misleading tallying from their surveyors.