Mahama committed to bringing lasting peace to Bawku – Minister of Defence assures Otumfuo

Read Comments Comments (6)

• Justrac Africa Ltd 9 months ago

  We help secure your perimeter with modern ELECTRIC FENCE SYSTEMS that supports alarm system and backup battery system. We sell and install ELECTRIC FENCE SYSTEMS & CCTV CAMERAS. Call/WhatsApp: 0501796870 for more info. I8ijuy

  We help secure your perimeter with modern ELECTRIC FENCE SYSTEMS that supports alarm system and backup battery system. We sell and install ELECTRIC FENCE SYSTEMS & CCTV CAMERAS. Call/WhatsApp: 0501796870 for more info. I8ijuy

  reply
• TWEAA DC 9 months ago

  TALK IS CHEAP OMANE BOAMAH....WE ARE ALL WAITING....TWEAA.

  TALK IS CHEAP OMANE BOAMAH....WE ARE ALL WAITING....TWEAA.

  reply
• Concerned Citizens of Kusaug 9 months ago

  USE OF MEDIATION TO DETERMINE CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS IN BAWKU IS UNACCEPTABLE
  
  On January 14, 2025, in his very first trip outside Accra following his inauguration, President John Mahama went to Bawku to thank the Chief and pe ...
  read full comment

  USE OF MEDIATION TO DETERMINE CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS IN BAWKU IS UNACCEPTABLE
  
  On January 14, 2025, in his very first trip outside Accra following his inauguration, President John Mahama went to Bawku to thank the Chief and people of Bawku for their support during his successful election campaign and to assure the Chief of his commitment to work to restore lasting peace in Bawku. The President indicated he was due to visit the Asantehene on January 19, 2025 and would discuss with the Asantehene the status of his mediation in the Bawku crises, a role to which he had been assigned by the previous government. Thereafter, the President would determine the next steps in finding solutions to the Bawku crises.
  
  The six Members of Parliament in the Kusaug area met on February 12, 2025 with the Minister of Defence, Hon. Edward Boamah and the Minister of Interior, Hon. Mubarak Muntaka. At the end of the meeting, the Defence Minister issued a statement which read in part:
  
  “We reviewed the current security situation relating to the chieftaincy dispute in Bawku. As President John Dramani Mahama has assured the people, we will continue to follow the comprehensive roadmap to resolve this conflict through traditional means” [Emphasis added]
  
  But what exactly does Hon. Defence Minister Boamah mean by “through traditional means”? Is he thinking about the use of mediation led by the Asantehene as the government’s comprehensive roadmap to determine the matter of chieftaincy in Bawku? If so, that will be an exercise in futility.
  
  Limitations in the use of Mediation
  
  It is very important to point out some major limitations in the use of mediation to resolve the crises in Bawku, and for which reasons the use of mediation to resolve an alleged chieftaincy dispute would be unacceptable.
  
  For the avoidance of doubt, it should be emphasized that the authors are not opposed to the general use of mediation to create the conditions for peaceful coexistence of the various ethnic groups in Bawku under the sole and undisputed authority of the current Chief in Bawku. However, what the authors object to, and find to be impractical, is any attempt to use the mediation procedure for the specific purpose of investigating and issuing a ruling on the matter of who is the chief of Bawku.
  
  In principle, there are two main ways of resolving disputes: the informal and the formal methods. Dispute settlement mechanisms generally recommend the use of the informal methods and a resort to more formal methods where the informal methods fail.
  
  The informal methods such as consultations or mediation provide avenues for the parties to work out between themselves mutually acceptable solutions to the dispute. Consultations involve direct discussions or negotiations between the parties.
  
  Where direct discussions are not feasible or realistic under the circumstances, mediation may be used. In mediation a neutral and independent third party would facilitate conflict resolution by supervising the exchange of information and the bargaining process between the parties.
  2 / 4
  Participation in the mediation process is voluntary and the mediator has no power to make any binding decisions. Both parties must agree to any terms to resolve the dispute but such agreement merely consists of voluntary commitments that the parties could walk away from during the mediation process itself or anytime afterward.
  
  In contrast, the formal dispute resolution processes, such as litigation and arbitration, result in decisions that are binding on all the parties. In litigation, a court presided by a judge examines the facts presented and delivers the binding judgement. Similarly, in arbitration, the arbitrator makes a binding award after examining the facts.
  
  From this brief survey of the dispute settlement mechanisms, it is quite apparent why the use of mediation in addressing alleged chieftaincy claims in Bawku would be highly inappropriate.
  
  There is no chieftaincy conflict because there is only one Chief in Bawku
  
  First, there is only one chief for Bawku. He is Zugraan Bawku Naba Asigri Abugrago Azoka II. Zugraan was recognized as such in a 2003 Supreme Court decision. He was duly gazetted and has exercised that authority since. The Supreme Court case, which was not appealed from, is therefore final and binding and cannot be reopened through any means, including mediation.
  
  Indeed, President Mahama recognizes this critical fact. During his Building Ghana tour in the Upper East region in February 2024, the then Presidential Candidate Mahama at a stop in Bawku stated quite emphatically that there is no conflict in Bawku because every government recognizes Naba Asigri Abugrago Azoka II as the chief of Bawku. He stated then that:
  
  “My final issue and that is the most important is the issue of peace. What I read in the media is the Bawku Chieftaincy conflict. There is no chieftaincy conflict in Bawku. There cannot be two kings in one kingdom.
  
  “Every government recognizes the Overlord of Bawku who is Naba Asigri Abugrago Azoka II and that is why I say there is no conflict. No chieftaincy conflict so peace on Bawku is going to be my priority when I become President.” [Emphasis added]
  
  A Mediator has no power to determine who is Chief of Bawku
  
  Second, a mediator has no decision-making authority. Therefore, no mediator, (not even the revered Asantehene) has the legal authority to investigate the Bawku chieftaincy matter and to make a definitive ruling as to who is the Chief of Bawku.
  
  Third, it is noted that the Asantehene previously mediated in the Dagbon chieftaincy matter. That case involved a dispute between the Andani and Abudu families each of which held legitimate claims to the Yendi Skin. Such claims by duly recognised rival factions were clearly amenable to the mediation process managed by the Asantehene. The Bawku case is however, different. The matter of who is chief in Bawku has been conclusively determined as noted above. There is no rival chief with legitimate claims that would require mediation to assist in finding solutions thereto.
  
  Fourth, any agreement by our traditional authorities, our MPs or other leaders to the use of
  3 / 4
  mediation will be to fall into a trap set by the Mamprusis to create an environment of “false equivalence” where under the guise of mediation, the upstart and nonentity Seidu Abagre will be elevated and treated as “chief of a rival faction” by stakeholders interested in the outcome of the mediation, including the Government.
  
  Securing Peace in Bawku is the Real Issue
  
  For lasting peace in Bawku, ZUGRAAN MUST BE RECOGNISED AND ACCEPTED BY ALL PARTIES AS THE UNDISPUTED CHIEF OF BAWKU pursuant to the Supreme Court decision. No other legal processes or mediation are required to affirm this.
  
  The Asantehene’s involvement was purely a strategy deployed by the previous Government to muddy the waters and to create a semblance of legitimacy for Seidu Abagre, a commoner son of a cobbler from a minority settler community, the Mamprusi tribe (comprising less than 5% of the population) with no claims to the Bawku skin and who out of the blue on February 23, 2023 proclaimed himself ruler of the entire Kusaug made up predominantly of the Kusaas tribe who comprise more than 70% of the population. This egregious and blatant illegal conduct of Mr. Abagre was roundly condemned and he was compelled to flee from Bawku when a warrant for his arrest was issued by the High court.
  
  President Mahama (or those of his advisers feeding him with inaccurate information) should be impressed upon to discard immediately any mediation plan they may be contemplating - it was disastrous and produced no results under the Akufo-Addo administration. Despite some protests against the mediation effort when it was first announced by the previous government, the traditional leaders and elders did not seem to recognize the trap then. The good people of Bawku should not be tricked again and fall into the same trap twice.
  
  What we need in Bawku is putting in place the structures to enforce the current Chief’s authority and also to punish the criminal elements who are intent on using baseless chieftaincy claims to fuel discontent and cause mayhem in Bawku.
  
  As President Mahama himself noted in February last year during his visit to Bawku, the real issue in Bawku is not chieftaincy but rather the complex task of maintaining peace. He pointed out then that this would require collaboration with security personnel to maintain law and order. In this context, he had observed “They have a very difficult job. Let’s collaborate with them so that they can help to maintain the peace and I can assure that when NDC comes we will make sure that peace comes to Bawku.”
  
  Thus, in his meetings with the Chief and people of Bawku prior to his inauguration on January 7, 2025, President Mahama never intimated the use of mediation to resolve a non-existent chieftaincy dispute. Rather his priority was, and is, to secure peace in Bawku through the active, adequate and effective intervention of law enforcement personnel.
  
  Therefore, the Defence Minister, the Interior Minister and the six Members of Parliament from Kusaug did not proceed in accordance with these very public signals from the President when they met on February 12, 2025 to discuss “the chieftaincy dispute in Bawku” and further, to opt for “traditional means” as the way resolve the alleged dispute.
  
  4 / 4
  The two ministers and other relevant parties in government should be advised to abandon their obsession with mediation which is impracticable under the circumstances in light of the existing final and binding Supreme Court decision. Instead, they should focus their time and energies on finding and adopting the necessary measures to beef up the security presence in Bawku, including on the roads and major highways, as a more viable way to ensure lasting peace in Bawku.

  reply
• Former Dining Hall Prefect 9 months ago

  Tweaaaaaa! A man who was stealing government money to buy khebab and pampers under Atta Mills has been appointed Minister again and you tell me you have formed ORAL to go after "all loot" and you expect me to take you seriou ...
  read full comment

  Tweaaaaaa! A man who was stealing government money to buy khebab and pampers under Atta Mills has been appointed Minister again and you tell me you have formed ORAL to go after "all loot" and you expect me to take you serious?

  reply
• Adame should inspire truth and confidence in the trade... 9 months ago

  Well, if you would agree for an Ewe man to go to Accra to be instooled as rival Ashanti chief and brought to Kumasi...

  Well, if you would agree for an Ewe man to go to Accra to be instooled as rival Ashanti chief and brought to Kumasi...

  reply
• From 9 months ago

  When? Hahaha, tweaaaa

  When? Hahaha, tweaaaa

  reply