A major chieftaincy dispute has erupted in the Gomoa Mpota community, as ten sectional heads of the Royal Takyina family petition the Judicial Committee of the Central Regional House of Chiefs to nullify the installation of four individuals as chiefs.
The petition, dated August 19, 2024 accuses the paramount chief of the Gomoa Ajumako Traditional Area, Obrimpong Nyanful Krampah XI, of wrongful interference in the affairs of the Royal Takyina family, leading to what the petitioners describe as an unlawful installation of chiefs.
The petition, filed by Nana Kwaw Egyir and nine other sectional heads, challenges the legitimacy of the installation of Kobena Arkoh, Yaw Abor, Kwaw Yeboah, and Justicia Acquaye as Oman Baatan, Odzekurow, Kyidomhene, and Kyidomhembaa, respectively. According to the petitioners, these appointments were made without the consent of the appropriate family authorities and in direct violation of Fante customary law.
The respondents in the petition are 1. Obrempong Nyanful Krampah XI, Omanhen of Gomoa Ajumako Traditional Area Omanhen’s Palace, Gomoa Ajumako; 2. Νana Αρpiah Baidua III, Queen mother of Gomoa Mpota and a principal member of the Royal Takyina family of Gomoa Mpota); 3. Panyin Kwesi Gurah; 4. Kobena Arkoh; 5. Yaw Abor; 6. Kwaw Yeboah; and 7. Justicia Acquaye
According to the petition, by long-standing custom, the nomination and installation of chiefs must be done by the appropriate royal family in consultation with the principal members.
“What we are witnessing is a blatant usurpation of this process by the 1st respondent, who has overstepped his traditional jurisdiction,” the petition states.
The petition further alleges that the installation of the disputed chiefs took place despite the absence of a substantive head (ebusuapanyin) for the Royal Takyina family, following the removal of the former head, Opanyin Kwesi Gurah, in 2013 for misconduct.
Beyond the issue of chieftaincy appointments, the petitioners accuse Obrimpong Nyanful Krampah XI of exploiting the community’s resources for personal gain. They claim that, together with Nana Appiah Baidua III, the Queen Mother of Gomoa Mpota, he has taken control of family lands and appropriated stool land royalties without the consent of the sectional heads.
“The 1st and 2nd respondents have turned the affairs of our family into a personal business venture. They are granting portions of Mpota lands to third parties without consulting the rightful family authorities,” the petitioners claimed.
They further allege that the Omanhen has been using land guards to intimidate those who challenge his authority.
“We have seen armed men accompanying illegal land sales and installations. This must stop. We trust that the Judicial Committee will intervene to restore traditional order,” the petition added.
One of the most sensational claims in the petition is the alleged romantic relationship between the Omanhen and the Queen Mother of Gomoa Mpota, which, according to the petitioners, has led to undue influence over chieftaincy affairs.
According to the petitioners, it is an open secret that the 1st and 2nd respondents are in a romantic relationship, which has clouded judgment and led to the wrongful appointments they are challenging.
The petitioners argue that the fundamental structure of chieftaincy governance in Gomoa Mpota is being eroded by these actions.
Traditionally, the Odzekurow (second in command to the Omanhen) is appointed through a rigorous process involving all sectional heads. However, they claim that the Omanhen has unilaterally taken over this role.
“The history of our community does not support the creation of new chieftaincy positions at the whim of one individual. We cannot allow this dangerous precedent to continue,” they insist.
The creation of the Kyidomhene and Kyidomhembaa titles, which have never existed in Mpota before, has been cited as further proof of undue interference.
The petitioners are seeking several legal remedies, including:
1. A declaration affirming that only the rightful royal family, through its lawful processes, can nominate and install chiefs.
2. A declaration that the 1st respondent’s actions amount to wrongful interference in the affairs of the Royal Takyina family.
3. An order nullifying the purported installation of the 4th to 7th respondents.
4. An injunction restraining the installed individuals from holding themselves as traditional leaders.
5. An injunction against the Omanhen from further interfering in the affairs of Gomoa Mpota.
6. Any additional reliefs deemed just by the Judicial Committee.
