NANA KWESI ANDZIE VIII vs. NANA ANDZIE BOFO IX [1998]DLSC6749

Date	1998-06-17
Suit No.	CHIEFTAINCY APPEAL NO. 7/93
Citation No.	[1998]DLSC6749

AMPIAH (PRESIDING)

KPEGAH J.S.C.

ADJABENG J.S.C.

ACQUAH J.S.C.

ATUGUBA J.S.C.

E.B. ODURO FOR APPELLANT.

DR. S. TWUM HOLDING MR. AHENKORAH'S BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT.

[1998]DLSC6749
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >NANA KWESI ANDZIE VIII<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/
RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA ANDZIE BOFO IX<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CHIEFTAINCY
APPEAL NO. 7/93&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 17TH JUNE, 1998<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>E.B. ODURO FOR APPELLANT. <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DR. S. TWUM HOLDING MR. AHENKORAH'S
BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

AMPIAH (PRESIDING), KPEGAH J.S.C., ADJABENG
J.S.C., ACQUAH J.S.C., ATUGUBA J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>AMPIAH J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>I
have had the opportunity of reading before hand the opinion of my brother
Acquah, J.S.C. and I am in agreement with him that the appeal should be
dismissed. I however have this short comment to make on the judgment of the
Judicial Committee of the National House of Chiefs. <o:p></o:p>The
Judicial Committee of the National House of chiefs in restoring the decision of
the Asebu Traditional Council affirmed the decision that the Stool of Asebu
Ekroful belonged to the Defendant's Nsona Family. Having thus found, it was not
open to the Committee to order that the plaintiff should stay on the stool until
his death and that after his death no other person from his family should claim
the Stool or ascend it. It is now accepted that either gazetting a Chief or
putting his name on the Register of Chiefs does not put finality to the status
of that person. That by itself would not create an estoppel on any person or
family which subsequently legitimately claims the Stool. <o:p></o:p>It
is true that the defendant's family has not positively taken steps to claim
that Stool and that the plaintiff has been on the Stool for over 16 years
before the action, but as it was held in Agyakoma v. Opuni (1987-88) 1 GLR 47
S.C. at 49, <o:p></o:p>"...
accepting a substool was no renunciation of a royal birthright which was sealed
by the possession of royal blood". <o:p></o:p>And
in Darko v. Brako (1982-83) 1 GLR 345 S.C. it was held that non-ascension to a
Stool for 150 years was no bar to the appellant's family's claim thereto: <o:p></o:p>The
order by the Judicial Committee was made out of jurisdiction and should not
have affected execution of the Judgment. However, it is now established that
the plaintiff in the action is dead; whatever right was given him died with him<o:p></o:p>KPEGAH,
J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>I
have read the opinion agree with him that the appeal be dismissed<o:p></o:p>ADJABENG,
J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>I
agree that the appeal be dismissed.<o:p></o:p>ACQUAH.
J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>This
is an appeal challenging part of the judgment of the National House of Chiefs
dated 8th May, 1991 in respect of a chieftaincy dispute from Ekroful near Asebu
in the Central Region of the Republic of Ghana. The parties would be referred
to in the manner they appeared at the trial Tribunal. <o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff, Nana Kwesi Andzie VIII issued a writ of summons at the Judicial
Committee of the Asebu Traditional Council claiming from the defendant: <o:p></o:p>"Plaintiff
requires defendant to show cause as to why he, defendant has publicly asserted
that plaintiff is not Chief of Asebu Ekroful, which statement defendant made
public during a meeting at Asebu Ahenfie, whilst plaintiff is the accredited
and gazetted chief of Asebu Ekroful since about 16 years". <o:p></o:p>In
an affidavit accompanying his summons the plaintiff swore that he was enstooled
chief of Asebu Ekroful about 16 years ago and had been gazetted as such since
the last five years, and that his enstoolment was authorized by his royal
Adwinadze family. But then the defendant who succeeded his late uncle Nana
Andzie Bofo VIII as Tufuhene about ten months ago, started laying claims to the
Ekroful stool on grounds that he the defendant's ancestors founded the town of
Ekroful, and therefore the plaintiff was not the rightful person to be the
chief of the town. Consequently at a meeting at the palace of the paramount
chief at Asebu, the defendant did publicly assert that the plaintiff was not
the chief of Ekroful, and that he, the defendant was the chief. Hence the summons.
<o:p></o:p>