EBUSUAPANYIN KWA NANA v. EBUSUAPANYIN KWAME APAA
1998
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- BAMFORD-ADDO(PRESIDING)
- HAYFRON BENJAMIN J.S.C.
- ACQUAH J.S.C
- ATUGUBA J.S.C
- AKUFFO J.S.C
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Administrative Law
1998
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Supreme Court decision resolves a long-running chieftaincy dispute in the Gomoa Ajumako Traditional Area between two distinct sections of the Twidan family: the Odandan Twidan (Krampah) section and the Apata Kofi lineage of Pomadze. After the illness of Omanhene Nana Nyamful Krampah IX, the 2nd Respondent, Nana Apata Kofi XIV—then the gazetted Odikro of Pomadze who had sworn allegiance to Krampah IX—was nominated and installed as Omanhene, relying on a 1968 ad hoc committee report. Petitioners sought declarations that only their Odandan Twidan section could nominate and occupy the Omanhene stool and an injunction against interference. The Central Regional House of Chiefs found for Petitioners; the National House of Chiefs reversed and ordered rotation between the two families. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the High Court prohibition ruling had no res judicata effect, the ad hoc committee possessed only investigative power under Act 81 section 28, and the National House misapplied the Adjei-bi Kojo test and improperly substituted its view. The Court set aside the National House’s decision and restored the Central Regional judgment, affirming the Krampah dynasty’s exclusive claim to the Omanhene stool.
MRS. BAMFORD-ADDO, J.S.C.:
I have had the privilege of reading in advance the judgment of my brother Acquah J.S.C. and I agree entirely with him. I would however add my reasons in support. This is appeal from the judgment of the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the National House of Chiefs dated 14th September, 1984 allowing an appeal from a judgment dated 25th September, 1981 of the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the Central Regional House of Chiefs by the Petitioner/Appellants herein. The Petitioner/Appellant petitioned of the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the Central Regional House of Chiefs for the following reliefs:
a) A declaration that the Royal Odandan Twidan family is the only Omanhene Stool Family for the Gomoa Ajumako Paramount Stool.
b) That the Royal Odandan Twidan Paramount Stool family is the only rightful body capable of nominating candidate for enstoolment as the Omanhene of the Gomoa Ajumako Traditional area.
c) Defendants from interfering with the Paramount Stool or in any way arrogating to themselves any powers for nomination of a candidate for enstoolment as an Omanhene of the Gomoa Ajumako Traditional Area.
The Defendant/Respondent denied that the petitioner was entitled to any of the reliefs sought in his petition and averred that the nomination and enstoolment of 2nd Defendant/Respondent was proper, since the family of the Respondents owned the Paramount Stool of the Area.
The Chieftaincy Tribunal of the Central Regional House of Chiefs gave judgment in favour of the Petitioners and the Defendant/Respondents appealed to the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the National House of chiefs against the said judgment. The National House allowed the Appeal holding that the Defendant/Respondents had established that the paramountcy belongs to them and also concluding that succession to the Paramount stool should continue to be between the two families namely Appellant and Respondent. It is against this judgment that this appeal was brought by the Petitioner/Appellant herein.
According to history of Respondents their ancestors migrated from Techiman in the Brong-Ahafo and first settled at Mankessim and Gomoa Maim near present Essakyir. The migrants later split into smaller units and one group headed by one Assan moved to the present Gomoa Ajumako. That descendant of Assan became the first Omanhenes of Gomoa Ajumako and that the paramountcy belongs to their family. The evidence is that during a period of about 100 years the Appellants had enstooled nine Omanhene and