Krontihene of New Juaben Traditional Council fights back over exclusion from House of Chiefs

Tension continues to build up in New Juaben Traditional Council over alleged “ghost chiefs” presented to the National House of Chiefs and the deliberate exclusion of some Divisional Chiefs from the list presented by Omanhene of New Juaben Traditional Area Daasebre Prof. Emeritus Oti Boateng.

One of the Divisional Chiefs excluded from the list Krontihene of New Juaben Traditional Area, Baffuor Nyantakyi Tutu Boateng has therefore petitioned the National House Chiefs and other stakeholders over what he calls “illegalities and anomalies.”

Baffuor Nyantakyi Tutu Boateng contends in the petition that the exclusion of eight (8) existing and legitimate Divisional Chiefs and members of the New Juaben Traditional Council - Gyasehene, Kontihene, Kyidomhene, Manwerehene Ntotoyehene, Akyempemhene Ayoko)hene and Nkoso)hene from the list of Divisional Chiefs presented to the House of Chiefs is a serious breach.

He said the list of Divisional Chiefs presented contained non-existing stools, unheard of in the Traditional Area since 1875 when our ancestors arrived at the current location from Asante Juaben and finally established the New Juaben settlement in 1878. These non-existing and unheard of stools are Betomhene, Srodaehene, Nsukwaohene and Adwesohene.”

But in response, the New Juaben Traditional Council described the claim by the Kontihene as a "fatal misjudgment”.

The Traditional Council said among other things in a press statement that the Kontihene did not seek clarification from them before proceeding with the petition.

“Kontihene made the fallacious and vicious statement in his petition that ‘anomalies have occurred in the list presented to the National House of Chiefs and its President. This statement is falsely blaming the Traditional Council without any basis whatsoever”.

The Traditional Council said the Omanhene Daasebre Prof.Emeritus Oti Boateng had already written to the President of the National House of Chiefs to amend the LI of the detected errors with the specific inclusion of the names of the twelve Divisional Chiefs originally submitted but inadvertently excluded from the LI.

However, the Krontihene of New Juaben Traditional area Baffuor Tutu Nyantakyi Boateng is questioning the credibility of the alleged amendment and correction.

“On paragraph three (3) of your press release, I would be most grateful if you could finish me with the date the Traditional Council submitted its list to the National House of Chiefs. Under whose signature was the list submitted to the National House of Chiefs? Was there any Traditional Council meeting held to compile the list? When did the meeting take place? Who was present? And how come the Traditional Council committed such a grave mistake by including in the list non-existing and phantom stools like Nsukwaohene, Srodaehene, Betomhene and Adwesohene? How come the Traditional Council included Sub-divisional Chiefs; Akwadumhene, Suhyenhene, Adahene and Nyamekromhene as Divisional Chiefs? Do you call this list “the genuine names?”. Has the Traditional Council, under your Ag. leadership, lost its sense of genuineness?”

Below is the full statement issued

PRESS RELEASE

SLAVISH FIDELITY OF ANTIQUITY IN NEW JUABEN TRADITIONAL COUNCIL

I have read with disgust and indignation, the press release, captioned “PETITION OF NEW JUABEN KONTIHENE TO NATIONAL HOUSE OF CHIEFS – A FATAL MISJUDGMENT”, signed by Nana Twumasi Dankwa as Acting President in a pure showing of slavish fidelity of antiquity, and purported to have come from the New Juaben Traditional Council, at its emergency meeting cum press conference held without legal minimum on 22nd September 2020, in response to my petition to the National House of Chiefs dated 15th September 2020.

In my reaction to paragraph one (1) of your press release, it is of utmost importance to note that I have not been found guilty of any serious customary breaches last year by any competent body of adjudication. With regards to the minutes of the Traditional Council meetings in which you claim the customary breaches were recorded, it would only be prudent to make copies available to me for my response to any issues raised therein.

It is significant to note that I requested for a certified true copy of the minutes of the Traditional Council Meeting held on 3rd December 2019, on 27th January 2020 and after about eight (8) solid months, only God knows when my requested will be granted.

The obvious refusal of the Traditional Council under the influence of its leadership to grant my request is totally in contravention of the Right to Information Act 2019 (Act 989).

It is also not true that I have withdrawn myself from the activities of the New Juaben Traditional Council. If there is any alienation, then the blame should be placed squarely at the door steps of the powers that be, whose stock-in-trade has been, casting of insults, intimidation and driving away of Divisional, Sub-divisional and other Chiefs from the Palace based on extremely trivial and minor issues.

The powers that be, always create mountains out of molehills. This over-reactive and histrionic behavior of the powers be, have driven away many genuine committed Chiefs. It is enigmatic that this issue, which is extremely superfluous to my petition on the L. I. 2409 to the President of the National House of Chiefs, is being raised at this point in time. It is a clear demonstration of the implacable and vindictive nature of the leadership of the New Juaben Traditional Council.

On paragraph two (2) of your press release, let me state unequivocally that I am a man of impeccable integrity and loyal in my convictions. I always do what is right even when it not the easiest solution. It must be noted that questions of customary law are questions of law. In questions of law, as in the case of the anomalies detected in Regulation 7 (1) (h) of the L. I. 2409, hierarchical structure of relationships has no role to play, for as the adage goes, “the law is no respecter of persons”. It must also be mentioned that in this era of Chieftaincy in modernity, progress and development can only be achieved in the Traditional Area through consensus building and mutual respect, not through slavish fidelity of antiquity.

On paragraph three (3) of your press release, I would be most grateful if you could finish me with the date the Traditional Council submitted its list to the National House of Chiefs. Under whose signature was the list submitted to the National House of Chiefs? Was there any Traditional Council meeting held to compile the list? When did the meeting take place? Who was present? And how come the Traditional Council committed such a grave mistake by including in the list non-existing and phantom stools like Nsukwaohene, Srodaehene, Betomhene and Adwesohene? How come the Traditional Council included Sub-divisional Chiefs; Akwadumhene, Suhyenhene, Adahene and Nyamekromhene as Divisional Chiefs? Do you call this list “the genuine names?”. Has the Traditional Council, under your Ag. leadership, lost its sense of genuineness?

How come the Traditional Council did not do due diligence to detect these anomalies ab initio? Is the Traditional Council experiencing a period of indolence and lack of meticulousness under your Ag. leadership? I vehemently dispute your claim that the Omanhene had already written to the National House of Chief to amend the L. I. This is a falsity of the highest apogee: note that

I submitted my petition to the National House of Chiefs in the morning of 15th September 2020. Thereafter, the Nkabomhene of New Juaben called me on phone at about 4.25pm on the same day, pleading with me with considerable trepidation, that Daasebre has asked him to tell me to withdraw my petition as it was going to cause tremendous damage.

Not quite long after, at about 5.00pm that same day, you, in the person of Gyasehene of New Juaben, also followed up with a phone call to me with a similar message. I told both of you to get copies of my petition to read, after which you should call me for my answer. So before all these episodes, had the Omanhene already written to the National House of Chiefs to amend the L. I.? If so then what was the point in, he asking the two of you to tell me to withdraw my petition?

I want to emphatically make it clear to you that the Omanhene’s letter to amend the list was only written after I had submitted my petition and his letter was backdated to 11th September 2020 for it to appear that his letter was submitted before I submitted my petition. Please note that backdating a letter written to a public officer, is tantamount to deception of a public officer, which is a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana. Let me sound a note of caution here that, nobody should provoke me on this aspect, otherwise I will be compelled to trigger and precipitate the preferment of criminal charges. Do not be deceived that the backdating of the letter cannot be detected.

In response to paragraph four (4) of your press release, if anomalies were not detected in the list submitted by whoever, how could the Omanhene write a letter to the National House of Chiefs “to amend the L. I. of the detected errors…” as you have stated in paragraph three (3) of your press release. Did the detected errors not create anomalies in the L.I.? There is nowhere in my petition that I blamed the Traditional Council for the anomalies occasioned by Regulation 7 (1) (h) of the L. I. 2409.

Again, note that I never indicated anywhere in my petition that the list containing anomalies was submitted to the National House of Chiefs by the New Juaben Traditional Council. Can you cite any single sentence in my petition in which I blamed or said that the Traditional Council submitted the list to the National House of Chiefs?

It abundantly shows that there was total lack of comprehension on your part, in reading my petition. That notwithstanding the Traditional Council, and by extension its leadership, cannot absorb itself from the anomalies or errors occasioned by the L. I. This is because it took the timely intervention of myself, Baffour Nyantakyi Tutu Boateng, to petition the National House of Chiefs before the leadership of the Traditional Council reacted.

You cannot blame the other institutions through which the list from the New Juaben Traditional Area passed. You cannot pass the buck. It will be advisable for the leadership of the Traditional Council to accept responsibility for the anomalies created and render unqualified apologies to the other institutions through which the list passed, otherwise it will be considered as having lied, thereby committing perjury, to these institutions, including the National House of Chiefs, the Ministry of Chieftaincy and Religious Affairs, Parliament and the Judiciary.

This has dare consequences for the leadership of the Traditional Council, who are currently living in a state of rationalizing away the seriousness of the deliberate submission of a false list to the National House of Chiefs. When things come to a head, I will demand investigations into this matter.

On paragraph five (5) of your press release, the charges you have preferred against me for not passing my petition through the Omanhene or the Traditional Council fly in the face of the law. The Traditional Council has no locus to prefer charges against me. The issues I have raised, concerning the anomalies in Regulation 7 (1) (h) of the L. I. 2409, borders on registration of the names of Divisional Chiefs in the L.I. and such matters fall outside the jurisdiction of the Omanhene or the Traditional Council.

It would have been a cosmetic exercise in futility to pass my petition through the Omanhene or the Traditional Council. Section 59 (7) of the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759) stipulates that, “A person aggrieved by the refusal of the National House to register that person as a chief may within thirty days after the decision appeal against the decision to the Supreme Court”.

On paragraph six (6) of your press release, I would like to admonish the leadership of the Traditional Council to refrain from attempting to look sharp when no work has been done in the inclusion of the list of Divisional Chiefs from New Juaben in the L. I. 2409. Right from the onset I am reliably informed that the Omanhene had shown strong aversion to the admission of Divisional Chiefs into the Easter Regional House of Chiefs (ERHC). Although the Omanhene denied ever saying that he did not want his Divisional Chiefs to be admitted to the ERHC, paragraph F of his protestation letter dated 14th July 2020, addressed to the President of the National House of Chiefs and copied to you as the Ag President of the New Juaben Traditional Council, noticeably betrays his real intention. Simply put the Omanhene did not want his Divisional Chiefs to be on the ERHC. This was what triggered our initial exclusion by the ERHC.

I will advise you as my younger brother, henceforth, to apprise yourself very well with cogent facts and truth before appending your signature to a proxy letter written about me by the powers that be, and bringing it up for discussions at Traditional Council meetings and hurriedly arranged press conference without the Registrar of the Traditional Council inviting me to such meetings. This, to say the least, is preposterous.

BAFFOUR NYANTAKYI TUTU BOATENG

(KONTIHENE, NEW JUABEN TRADITIONAL AREA)