By James Kwabena Bomfeh Jnr (Ph.D)
1. Is the current Bawku Chieftaincy conflict just a tip of the iceberg?
When one reflects on what we hear from those who are more knowledgeable about chieftaincy, law, and practice in Ghana, one cannot help but come to the conclusion that the current Bawku chieftaincy conflict may just be the tip of an iceberg. The country must be guided.
Article 270, clause 1 of the 1992 Constitution is express and unambiguous. Thus, “the institution of chieftaincy, together with its traditional councils as established by customary law and usage, is hereby guaranteed.” To further demonstrate the seriousness of the provision, Parliament is disempowered to enact any law that “confers” or “withdraws recognition” to or from a chief (including queen-mothers).” Customary processes regulate chieftaincy affairs.
2. Have we in the past had any major chieftaincy conflicts in the country?
The answer is, yes! We have in the past had four major conflicts in the Northern part of the country which cost thousands of lives and destruction of property worth millions of cedis. In the early 1980s, during the government of President Dr. Hilla Limann we saw the Nanumba Konkomba conflict and the Gonja-Vagla conflict. During the time of Mr. J. J. Rawlings and the PNDC we saw a conflict involving Dagomba, Gonja, Mamprusi, Nanumba on one hand and the Konkomba, Nawuri, Nchummuru etc on the other. Lastly, during the time of President Kufuor in the 2000s, we witnessed a major conflict, internally among Dagombas, between Abudu-Adani after the tragic death of the Ya-Na, Yakubu Andani II.
3. What was the chieftaincy system in place in all these cases?
During the era of President Limann, it was the Chieftaincy Secretariat. Likewise, during the era of President Rawlings, it was the Chieftaincy Secretariat. During the time of President Kufuor, it was first the Chieftaincy Secretariat and then later the Chieftaincy Ministry.
4. What is a chieftaincy Secretariat or Ministry?
It is an office which serves as a bridge between traditional rule and central government. Normally, it is headed by a Presidential Staffer or Secretary as was the case during Presidents Limann and Rawlings’ times or, a Minister of State as was the case in the latter part of President Kufuor right up to the time of President Akufo-Addo. The staff of the office are civil servants recruited and trained by the government to assist chiefs to carry out their statutory duties.
The Chieftaincy Secretariat or Ministry has administrative oversight over all houses of chiefs and traditional councils in Ghana. It is a special place for chiefs. It has to be noted that chiefs in Ghana are not at all supposed to eat or drink in public. However, if a chief or queen-mother does so in the chieftaincy secretariat or ministry, he or she is deemed not to have done so in public. The office belongs to the government but it is also more or less a palace ex-officio for the chiefs and queen-mothers.
During chieftaincy conflicts, the Chieftaincy Secretariat or Ministry plays a crucial role in promoting trust, through behind-the-scenes diplomacy, between disputant chiefs as well as between chiefs and government. Indeed, during the above-mentioned conflicts, it is worthy of note that when the Asantehene accepted to lead in the struggle to settle the conflict in Dagbon for instance, chiefs across the country were all together with him moving in one direction like one silent army on a peace-keeping mission.
5. When was the Chieftaincy Secretariat established and why?
It was established in 1971 under the government of Prime Minister Prof. Busia. The reason for its establishment was to guarantee the independence of the chieftaincy institution. Its establishment in 1971 was, in fact, a reenactment of the status quo ante under the colonial regime where there was the Office of Native Affairs established in 1901 and directly administered by the Governor. It is an undeniable fact that during the first Republic under President Dr. Nkrumah, chieftaincy was under the Local Government Ministry, and the general view is that, this situation brought about interference in the chieftaincy institution by the government or state.
Let us not forget that the Act 81 which was passed under the government of President Nkrumah defined a chief as a person who has been enstooled or enskinned and has received Executive recognition. What this meant in effect was that the rightful heir to a stool or skin could not become a chief if he did not receive Executive recognition.
It is important to note that the Act 370 which was passed under the government of Prime Minister Busia, in its definition of a chief, did not at all mention Executive recognition. Likewise, the Act 759 passed during the government of President Kufuor which is the chieftaincy law in force, does not also require Executive recognition to become a chief.
6. The current Bawku Chieftaincy conflict and questions.
There are questions needing answers:
(i) By returning chieftaincy to Local Government today, are we not compromising the independence of chieftaincy?
(ii) If we want to reduce the number of our ministries, then why don’t we retain Chieftaincy as a Secretariat so as to guarantee the independence of the institution of chieftaincy?
(iii) In the absence of a Chieftaincy Secretariat or Ministry, can we settle the Bawku Chieftaincy conflict the same way we did with the earlier conflicts?
(iv) The Military and Police may be capable of stopping the fight, however, are they capable of providing the answers demanded by the factions? If no, what do we expect?
(v) Does it mean that from now on, chiefs and queen-mothers will be gazetted in Local Government Bulletins as happened under President Nkrumah?
(vi) Last, but not the least, is this development not likely to heighten mistrust and suspicion, not just among the chiefs but between the chiefs and government, which is inimical to peace-building?
7. Is Government Complicitous?
In the absence of the Chieftaincy Secretariat or a Ministry of Chieftaincy, how does Government hope to play the behind-the-scenes management necessary to amicably settle issues without they aggravating into an irreparable public affair? We are asking this fully aware that, the management of chiefs and queen-mothers require a lot of tact, respect and diplomatic wisdom.
May God help our country, Ghana, and make our nation great and strong!
