By Joyce Danso, GNA
Accra, Feb. 24, GNA- An Accra High Court has ordered the National House of Chiefs to restore the name of Nana Kwasi Darko II, Chief of Mayera Owulaiman in Ga West in its Register.
The court noted that the decision of the National House of Chiefs to expunge the name of Nana Kwasi Darko II from its register was procedurally wrong, ” null and void” and a breach of natural justice.”
According to the Court presided over by Justice Mrs Sedinam Awo Kwadam, the National House of Chiefs acted “ultra vires” in expunging the name of the applicant.
It therefore issued an order of Mandamus compelling the National House of Chiefs to restore the applicant’s name in the National Register of Chiefs with immediate effect.
The Court held that ” The National House of Chief is at liberty,, should it deem it unnecessary, to initiate lawful proceedings under the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759) to determine any question regarding the applicant’s status, provided that such proceedings shall be conducted in full compliance with the rules of natural justice and requirement of the Constitution, including the notice to all affected parties and a fair opportunity to be heard. Pending the final determination of any such proceedings, the applicant’s name shall remain on the Register.”
It therefore awarded a cost of GHC15,000 in favour of the applicant against the first and second respondents jointly and severally.
The first and second respondents are the President, the National House of Chiefs and the Registrar, National House of Chiefs, Kumasi,
The Court however declined to award costs against Dr Benhardt Ago Kumah, an Interested Party also known as Nana Akwasi Darko II.
Nana Kwasi Darko, the applicant contended that he was duly nominated , elected and installed as the Chief or Mantse of Mayera Owulaiman (also referred to as Owuraman) in accordance with customary law and usage.
Following his installation, his name was duly registered with the National House of Chief and published in the Chieftaincy Bulletin , thereby clothing him with statutory recognition as required by law.
However, by a letter written by Lawyer Ayikoi Otoo (Esquire), on behalf of one Dr Benhardt Ago Kumah, the National House of Chiefs was invited to expunge the applicant’s name from the National Register.
The gravermen of the letter was that the applicant was an imposter holding himself out as Chief, that Mayera Owulaiman fell within the Ga Traditional Council and not the Akwamu Traditional Council, and that the chieftaincy declaration forms had been processed through the wrong traditional authority.
The National House of Chiefs, upon receipt of the correspondence, acted on it by responding and affirming Counsel Ayikoi Otoo’s claim and proceeded to expunge the applicant’s name from the Register of Chiefs.
The applicant was not notified of the complaint lodged against him and not also afforded the opportunity to respond to the allegation before his name was expunged
The applicant became aware of the development when his name had been removed from the Chief Register.
The National House of Chiefs in its response stated that “it had conducted thorough investigations” and on that basis expunged the applicant’s name.
The Court noted that the applicant was “given no notice and no hearing.”
The Court, among other reasons, set down issues for determination, including whether the High Court had the jurisdiction to entertain an application for judicial review in a matter touching on chieftaincy.
It was also to determine whether the applicant ought to have appealed against the expungement of his name under Section 59 (7) of the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759) instead of invoking the supervisory jurisduction of the High Court under Section 43 of the Act.
The High Court held that it had jursidiction to entertain the application as the application concerns the procedural legality of an administrative act and not a substantive chieftaincy dispute.
“The Supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 141 extends to reviewing the decsions of the National House of Chiefs for complaince with the due process and natural justice.”
According to the Court, the applicant was not required to appeal under Section 59 (7) of the Chieftaincy Act before invoking the superivisory juristiction of the High Court.
The Court further held that the applicant had the locus standi to compel the restoration of his name as the National House of Chiefs had failed to perform its public duty according to law.
It noted that the Register of Chiefs was “amended based on mere accusation or allegations. It is altered legally by due process. The laws of this land will not tolerate brazen illegality by administrative power.”
The Court comended the applicant for demonstrating commendable restraints and civic maturity.
It noted the applicant upon hearing that his name had been expunged from the Chief Register did not resort to self help and organise his uspporters to confront anyone.
According to the Court, the applicant did not also do anything that could threaten public order or safety.
“Instead, he came to this court seeking judicial redress. He placed his faith in the rule of law. This is what precisely the Constitution expect of every person.”
Nana Kwasi Darko II urged chiefs to resort to legal redress and desist from organising people to fight or resort to voilence.
GNA
24 Feb. 2026
Edited by Samuel Osei-Frempong