By Evans Worlanyo Ameamu
Anloga (V/R), Sept. 03, GNA – The ‘Awadada’ Arbitration Court of the Anlo State, known in Ewe as “Agɔwowɔnu,” in Volta region, continues to serve as the highest and final traditional court of arbitration for the Anlo people.
The task of the ‘Awadada’ Arbitration Court is to resolve disputes over land, chieftaincy and stool matters that have defied settlement at lower levels of traditional authority.
The Court, which sits at Anloga, the traditional capital of the Anlo State, derives its authority from a long-standing customary hierarchy of dispute resolution.
Mr Silas Kwame Aidam, the Court’s Secretary, told Ghana News Agency in an interview that traditionally, a dispute first must go before the head of the affected family, and where it remained unresolved, it was referred to the chief of the town.
“Should the town chief’s court fail to bring reconciliation, the matter proceeds to the divisional chiefs. Cases that remain unresolved after passing through these stages are finally referred to the Awadada Arbitration Court, which stands as the last resort within the traditional system,” he said.
He described the Court as the pillar of peacebuilding in the traditional area which had over generations, settled disputes that could have otherwise degenerated into prolonged conflict between families and communities.
Mr Aidam indicated that among the matters that came before the Court were chieftaincy disputes concerning rightful succession to stools, land and lagoon disputes between Anlo towns, and other deep-rooted disagreements among natives that had proven resistant to resolution elsewhere.
“The Court operates under the ultimate authority of the Awadada of Anlo State, Togbi Agbesi Awusu II, with direct supervision entrusted to Togbi Zewu IV.
Its composition draws representation from all Three Wings, or Divisions, of the Anlo State, a structure of traditional authority that reflects the unity of the Anlo people and lends the Court’s decisions on their broad acceptance with records,” he said.
Mr Aidam explained that beyond the traditional standing, the Awadada Arbitration Court’s authority was reinforced by the laws of Ghana with Article 11(2) of the 1992 Constitution, recognising customary law as part of the common laws of Ghana, while Articles 270 to 277 guaranteed the institution of chieftaincy as custodian of customary law, which provided constitutional grounding for the Court’s role.
He emphasised that the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759), further consolidated the authority, while Section 30 of the Act empowered any chief to act extra-judicially as an arbitrator under customary law in disputes where the parties concerned consented to his so acting, which gave legal backing to the arbitration processes carried out at bodies such as the Awadada Arbitration Court.
He said that the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2010 (Act 798), also made specific provision for customary arbitration under Part III, particularly Sections 90, 114 and 135, with Section 90 requiring that parties submit voluntarily to arbitration, which was traditionally signified by the payment of a token, or ‘aseda.’
“Awards made under this process are binding on the parties and may, where necessary, be registered at the High Court for enforcement,” he said.
Mr Aidam stated that the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459), also permitted judges presiding over formal court proceedings to refer certain categories of cases, particularly those involving land and chieftaincy, back to customary arbitration bodies for resolution, effectively recognising the complementary role such courts played alongside the formal judicial system.
He added that other Legal observers consulted had noted that the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, placed clear limits on the scope of customary arbitration, and serious felonies fell outside the jurisdiction of such bodies.
He said such cases were to be handled by the formal courts, as Awadada Arbitration Court’s mandate was accordingly confined to customary civil disputes and customary offences for which the law permitted settlement by traditional authorities.
Some traditional leaders of Anlo had noted that the dual foundation resting on both custom and statute was what gave Court rulings their weight, and therefore a decision delivered at the “Agɔwowɔnu,” was not merely a traditional pronouncement but one that carried the backing of the Ghanaian law, binding in both moral and legal terms.
As chieftaincy and land disputes continues to arise across the Volta Region, traditional authorities in Anlo have maintained that institutions such as the Awadada Arbitration Court remained vital to preserving peace, reinforcing the views that “when the final gavel falls at ‘Agɔwowɔnu’ both Anlo tradition and the law of Ghana speak with one voice.”
GNA.
Edited by: Maxwell Awumah/ Christabel Addo