Overlord Of Dagbon Accuses Otumfuo's Mediation Committee Of Peddling "Untruths" & "Bias"
The Regent of Dagbon, Kampakuya-Naa Anadani Yakubu Abdulai has raised a number of concerns with the mediation process aimed at bringing peace to Dagbon.
In a statement addressed to former President John Agyekum Kufuor and John Dramani Mahama as well President Nana Akufo Addo, the Dagbon Regent accused the Committee of Eminent Chiefs brokering peace in the Dagbon chieftaincy empasse [Otumfuo Mediation Committee] of bias, adding that their decisions are entirely out of tune with the principles of mediation and with Dagbon customs.
“The pronouncements of His Majesty Otumfuo before Your Excellency on 21st November exposes clearly the untruths on which the “decisions” of the Mediation Committee of the Eminent Chiefs is based. Their decisions, entirely out of tune with the principles of mediation and with Dagbon customs, appear to be aimed at achieving an agenda that should not be adopted by Your Excellency, democratic father of all Ghanaians, under the oath you took upon the assumption of office.”
“The bias of the Otumfuo Committee against the non-partisan Kingmakers of Dagbon is quite palpable. The Eminent Chiefs ignored them to set up this Council to perform their functions. Many of the members of the Committee were Princes aspiring to chieftaincy promotions and even to the Yendi skins. Their mandate included, among others, the offer of advice on the performance of funerals, including that of the Yaa-Naa and the appointment of replacement chiefs for those deceased.”
The Regent expressed his dissatisfaction with what he called a deliberate attempt to prevent him from carrying out his responsibilities of administering stool lands and installing chiefs.
The Regent also denied what he described as the misleading impression created by the Otumfuo during his speech at Jubilee House that he “deliberately acted to prevent the performance of the final funeral rites of” his late father, Naa Yakubu II.
“This erroneous impression, which the Mediation Committee is seeking to create cannot be supported by the facts, and appears to be the case of giving a dog a bad name, to hang it. I have consistently demonstrated by word and deed, to the knowledge of the Mediation Committee and the Government of Ghana my eagerness to see the performance of the final funeral rites of my murdered late father, in accordance with the customs of Dagbon,”
“I write to express to Your Excellency my appreciation for your determination to bring enduring peace to Dagbon. I also wish to draw your attention to the following critical issues arising from the last meeting of the Mediation Committee (MC) set up to bring Dagbon peacefully back to its culture and traditions as it relates to the Nam of Yani and the subsequent presentation of their progress report to Your Excellency on Wednesday 21st November 2018,” he said in the statement.
Below is the statement from the Regent
MATTERS ARISING FROM THE PROGRESS REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF EMINENT CHIEFS PRESENTED TO YOUR EXCELLENCY ON 21st NOVEMBER, 2018
I write to express to Your Excellency my appreciation for your determination to bring enduring peace to Dagbon. I also wish to draw your attention to the following critical issues arising from the last meeting of the Mediation Committee (MC) set up to bring Dagbon peacefully back to its culture and traditions as it relates to the Nam of Yani and the subsequent presentation of their progress report to Your Excellency on Wednesday 21st November 2018.
The pronouncements of His Majesty Otumfuo before Your Excellency on 21st November exposes clearly the untruths on which the “decisions” of the Mediation Committee of the Eminent Chiefs is based. Their decisions, entirely out of tune with the principles of mediation and with Dagbon customs, appear to be aimed at achieving an agenda that should not be adopted by Your Excellency, democratic father of all Ghanaians, under the oath you took upon the assumption of office.
FINAL FUNERALS RITES OF MY LATE FATHER, NAA YAKUBU II
Your Excellency, I wish to categorically deny the misleading impression created by the Otumfuo during his speech at Jubilee House that I have deliberately acted to prevent the performance of the final funeral rites of my late father, Naa Yakubu II. This erroneous impression, which the Mediation Committee is seeking to create cannot be supported by the facts, and appears to be the case of giving a dog a bad name, to hang it.
I have consistently demonstrated by word and deed, to the knowledge of the Mediation Committee and the Government of Ghana my eagerness to see the performance of the final funeral rites of my murdered late father, in accordance with the customs of Dagbon.
I recall that, on Tuesday 12th February 2013, I invited the following senior chiefs to the Gbewaa Palace, for a discussion of related matters:
1. Kar-Naa Mahama Adam (deceased);
2. Yoo-Naa Abukari Mahama;
3. Mion-Lana Alhassan Abudu Ziblim (deceased).
I expressed to them my strong desire to commence preparations for the performance of the final funeral rites for Naa Yakubu II. To give effect to this strong desire, I directed them to lend support for the reconstruction of the houses of key elders that were destroyed in the unfortunate events in Yendi in March 2002. The affected homes were those for Mba Dugu, Kpahigu, Malli and Gu-Lana. The need for the rehabilitation of the Palaces of Zohe-Naa and Kum-Lana was also tabled, because of their role in the enskinment of a new Yaa-Naa which would undoubtedly have taken place at the end of Naa Yakubu’s funeral rites.
The three, namely, Kar-Naa, Yoo-Naa, and Mion-Lana gave their consent. The Mediation Committee, the Northern Regional Security Council and the Government of Ghana were duly informed at the time. Upon our request, those houses have long been completed, but the keys remain in the custody of the Government and the Committee of Eminent Chiefs, for reasons we have never understood. I went beyond that, Your Excellency, to personally finance the construction of parts of the Zohe-Naa’s Palace, which were not captured in the initial estimates. Further preparing for the funeral, I went to Lingbunga, the maternal home of Naa Yakubu II and rehabilitated the family house, which by custom, would host the last funeral rites for him, after the major one in Yendi.
Of the three senior chiefs that were invited for the discussions, the only survivor today is the Chief of Savelugu who can attest to this fact. It is therefore not true that I have consciously worked to prevent the performance of the funeral.
Your Excellency, the Otumfuo’s suggestion that I refused to respond to his invitations is also not factual. I actually met him twice at Manhyia on 1st February 2015 and 18th July 2017, once at my behest and once at his invitation. A third invitation was sent during the Bu?um (Fire) festival in September 2018, when it was inappropriate to leave Yendi. Through his intermediary, he agreed to postpone my visit to a later date. When I followed up later, the first week of October 2018, he indicated that he was traveling to South Africa and would invite me upon his return. I have since not heard from him.
I did not also unilaterally get my Lawyer to go to him, but advised the Lawyer to respond favourably to his invitation, on a matter before his Committee, which, strangely, is also receiving judicial attention, at the instance of persons claiming to be leaders of the Abudu Royal Gate, for whom he has no blame. The Courts have been contemptuously ignored by the Committee.
The Otumfuo further grossly erred when he claimed that a very uncustomary advisory Council of Elders he put in place could not meet. The Council met at least seven times with its last meeting in December 2011. During its lifetime, it discussed and advised me on funerals, land administration, and the customs of Dagbon. Copies of the minutes were sent to the Northern Regional Minister and the Yendi Municipal Assembly. Copies of the minutes of the last two meetings were sent to the Chairman of the Committee of Eminent Chiefs.
The bias of the Otumfuo Committee against the non-partisan Kingmakers of Dagbon is quite palpable. The Eminent Chiefs ignored them to set up this Council to perform their functions. Many of the members of the Committee were Princes aspiring to chieftaincy promotions and even to the Yendi skins. Their mandate included, among others, the offer of advice on the performance of funerals, including that of the Yaa-Naa and the appointment of replacement chiefs for those deceased.
Even though serious reservations were expressed by the kingmakers and some participants in the mediation process, all reluctantly cooperated, in the interest of peace. The appointment of the Kuga-Naa as Chairman of the Council could not suffice to cure the severe flaws in the creation of this Committee to undermine the centuries-old traditional institutions of Dagbon.
The motives of the Otumfuo for publicly peddling untruths about me are only in the secret of the gods and his collaborators. Those motives should, however, explain the difficult situation in which he has all along tried to paint me. I must mention, in the same context, that, contrary to the Otumfuo’s assertion, I have never had any personal representatives among the delegations to Manhyia for the mediation. The delegations were in place before my enskinment as Regent.
THE MEDIATION COMMITTEE AND THE CUSTOMS AND TRADITIONS OF DAGBON
Upon its inception, the Mediation Committee by its utterances left no party in the mediation process in doubt that it was going to be guided by the customs and traditions of Dagbon in its deliberations. The Chairman, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II indicated that he and the other eminent members of the committee have reverence for the customs and Nam of Dagbon. There was no reason for any person to doubt this, as their Majesties are highly respected and honourable traditional leaders of respected kingdoms in our country.
Your Excellency, the Mediation Committee, with the support of successive governments, has tried to steer Dagbon back on course from the mess the kingdom was pushed into on 27th March 2002. It is a human institution, however, and most of its recommendations appear to be in sharp contrast to the well-established customs and traditions of Dagbon. Matters of custom previously pronounced on by the Committee, particularly on the proper venue for the funeral of the one who has come to be known as Naa Mahamadu, being the house in which he died, suddenly changed to the old Palace, to accommodate the wishes of the Abudus. This decision among other inconsistencies, a source of worry, is the reason for the eternal nature of the mediations rather than the wish of any individual.
The following examples, Your Excellency, would illustrate this view:
(i) His Majesty the Otumfuo, in Jubilee House, on 21st November, referred to a Clause in the Final Peace Agreement (Roadmap) of 2006, which provided that the powers of the Regent of Dagbon shall be limited such that he shall have no power to appoint chiefs or alienate lands or other resources of Dagbon. The committee explained that it took this “decision” owing to the “peculiar” circumstances of Dagbon. That decision was unprecedented in the customs and traditions of Dagbon, and against the express provisions of Article 267 of the 1992 Constitution, which provides that, “(1) All stool lands in Ghana shall vest in the appropriate stool on behalf of, and in trust for the subjects of the stool in accordance with customary law and usage.” As the legitimate Regent of Dagbon and acting Yaa-Naa, I have a constitutional right and customary power to appoint chiefs and administer the area, including the approval of land allocations by my subordinate chiefs. Under Dagbon custom and the law, the Yaa-Naa as the allodial owner of Dagbon land is a signatory to all land leases. He does not directly make allocations. All land transactions in Dagbon could, therefore, have been held up indefinitely if the ill-informed “decision” of the eminent chiefs had been given the force of law.
When they were Regents of Dagbon at various periods in our history, Kampakuya-Naa Andani Yakubu and Bolin-Lana Mahamadu Abudulai, exercised the established right to enskin chiefs. All Dagbamba who lived through the regency of each of these two can attest to this. Indeed, no Dagbana accepted the provision in clause (f) of the Final Peace Agreement (Roadmap), except those who were desirous to see the obliteration of the customs of Dagbon as long as that served their parochial interest.
Naabapra Bolin-Lana Mahamadu Abudulai when he was in regency as Bolin-Lana enskinned the following chiefs
1.Kukuo-Kpang-Lana Issah Salifu
2. Nyimbung-Naa Yibram
3. Balo-Naa Abdulai
4. Gu-Lana Abukari
5. Yani Liman Mahama
6. Zohe-Naa Abdulai Alhassan
7. Gagbun-Dana Abdulai Ziblim
He also enskinned other chiefs to Saakpuli, Langa and Kushebihi.
The validity of enskinments by regents was confirmed in the fact that, chiefs enskinned by the Bolin-Lana while he was Regent remained untouched. Those enskinned after his purported enskinment as Yaa-Naa were deskinned, following the eventual nullification of his own enskinment, on grounds (among others) that he was not enskinned Yaa-Naa by the rightful kingmakers.
Going by the same custom, His Majesty Yaa-Naa Yakubu II, then Kampakuya-Naa, in his regency, enskinned the following chiefs
<<Print>>