NANA GYAMFI KUMANIN II & ORS v. OPANIN KWAKU ANIN & ANOR.
1998
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- EDWARD WIREDU, J.S.C. (PRESIDING)
- HAYFRON-BENJAMIN, J.S.C.
- KPEGAH, J.S.C.
- ACQUAH, J.S.C.
- ATUGUBA, J.S.C
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
1998
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Supreme Court appeal arose from a split decision of the National House of Chiefs (3–2) affirming the Ashanti Regional House of Chiefs’ reversal of the Kumasi Traditional Council’s judgment that favored Taahyenhene Nana Kwame Gyamfi Kwanini II. The controversy concerned whether the Asaago Odikro stool owed allegiance to the Taahyen stool or directly to the Golden Stool (Asantehene). The majority—Wiredu, Acquah, Kpegah and Atuguba—applied deference to trial fact-finding and the Adjeibi‑Kojo test, preferring recent acts over inconsistent traditional narratives. Exhibit A documented Asaago’s Odikro swearing in front of Taahyenhene during Taahyen’s enstoolment. Exhibit B contained the respondent’s admission (“we are all your children and we all belong to you”), and the customary sending of a thigh of sheep to Taahyenhene to report destoolment showed overlordship. The majority set aside the National and Regional House decisions and declared that the Asaago stool owes allegiance to the Taahyenhene; the respondent’s counterclaim of direct allegiance to the Asantehene failed.
EDWARD WIREDU, J.S.C.:
This appeal is from the decision of the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the National House of Chiefs dated 16th August, 1995.
This judgment by a majority of 3 to 2 affirmed the decision of the Ashanti Region House of Chiefs dated 9th March, 1993, in favour of the co-petitioner Respondent who will hereafter be referred to simply as the Respondent.
The Ashanti Regional Houses of Chief by it's decision referred to supra had allowed an appeal brought by the Respondent against the decision of the Judicial Committee of Kumasi Traditional Council which by a majority of 2 to 1 upheld a claim by the petitioner appellant by its judgment dated 31st May, 1991.
The petitioner appellant in this case will hereafter be referred to simply as the appellant.
The main issue raised for determination in this appeal is an answer to the question "Whether there exists a constitutional relationship between the appellant stool and the Asaago Odikro Stool?" The appellant claims that there exits such a relationship and contends that the Asaago Odikro swears the oath of allegiance to him as Taahyenhene to Otumfuo the Asantehene whilst the Respondent by his counter-claim, claims that he is the Head of Family of Asaago Stool. He joined issue with the appellant by an oath contending that the Asaago Stool swears the oath of allegiance direct to the Golden Stool (Asantehene) and that the Asaago Stool is not subservient to the Taahyenhene.
It is of significance to note here that it is this issue which was determined before the trial Chieftancy Tribunal in Kumasi in favour of the appellant.
The proceedings show that both parties provided evidence traditionally as to how their respective stools came from Denkyira to settle in Ashanti, evidence on matters within living memory both oral and documentary. The appellant provided evidence by himself and three other witnesses including the Obaapanin of Asaago, the present Odikro himself and one Baffour Awuah Gyasehene of Atwimahene. The appellant further tendered in evidence proceedings relating to an action the Obaapanin and Asaago Odikro brought before the Kumasi Traditional Council against him when he purported to remove the Odikro by oath. The proceedings in this action show that the matter was settled and the result was accepted by the parties. The appellant further tendered in evidence a letter sent to him by the Respondent claiming a share of monies realised from the sale of a portion of Asaago lands stating in that lette