A MOTION seeking to stop the Paramount Chief of Eastern Nzema Traditional Area (ENTA) from using the stool name (AmihereKpanyile), for which reason he became a subject of heated debate during a meeting of the Western Regional House of Chiefs (WRHC) to elect the President, Vice President and five other members to the National House of Chiefs (NTC) has been settled by the Supreme Court.
The motion, filed by one Nana NyamekyeBoadi and others, as the applicant had the Omanhene as a respondent.
The applicant was praying the SC to stop the respondent from using the stool name and title, AmihereKpanyile, for the reason that the name did not emanate from ENTA.
After both parties had presented their cases, the five-member panel, which comprises of JusticeAnim Yeboah, N.S. Gbadegbe, S.K Marful-Sau, Mariam Owusu and YonneyKulendi dismissed the application as unmeritorious. A cost of GHC10,000.00 was consequently awarded against the applicant.
BACKGROUND
On October 6, 2020 a motion for interlocutory injunction seeking to restrain the Omanhene from using the stool name was allegedly served on the WRHC through the Registrar, Samuel Owusu Brempong.
At the time the motion was served on the House, Amihere Kpanyile’s name was on the ballot contesting for the presidency of the House.
A certified copy of the minute of the House dated, 20-10-2020 in the possession of The Chronicle reveals that, the Chairman of the meeting directed the suit to be read to the House for its consideration.
This led to a heated debate among the members, over whether or not the respondent should be allowed to contest the election and also vote.
First to comment was Awulae Attibrukusu III, Omanhene of Lower Axim. He argued that in law, a service only took effect when the affected person was duly served.
Considering that the House was not a party to the suit and there was also no evidence as to whether or not the respondent had been served, the respondent could take part in the voting process.
ObrempongHimaDekyi XIV, Omanhene of Upper Dixcove on his part disagreed.
He argued that since Amihere Kpanyilewas a respondent in the suit, by virtue of the law, he could not take part in the voting process.
“Once the House has been served as a party, he ought not to take part in the exercise”, HimaDekyi told the House, as contained in the minutes for that particular day.
Tetretteh Okuamoah Sekyim II, Omanhene of WassaAmenfi, on his part, argued that since the House had been served it means the respondent who is a member of the House had also been served and that he should be restrained from voting.
Nana Kwesi Agyeman XI, Omanhene of Lower Dixcove on his part argued that the respondent had used the title for several years and even used it to contest, win and act as Vice presidentof the House.
For this reason, it would be unfair if their colleague (respondent) was not allowed to contest the election and also vote.
AwulaeAngamatuo Gyan II, Omanhene of Gwira, also contended that the House did not have the right to pass a YES or NO verdict on the matter. They should just go by the motion, in other words, the respondent’s name should be excluded from the exercise.
AwulaeAnnorAdjaye III, Omanhene of Western Nzema Traditional Area, disagreed with the earlier contributors on the grounds that the person at the centre of the controversy was a Paramount Chief, the Vice president and Chairman of the Research Committee of the House for the past four years.
Records in the house also indicated that he had all along been using that name. He therefore advised the House not to entertain the motion at all and allow the respondent to take part in the election and same vote.
After argument for and against, the Acting president of the House, Agyefi Kwame ruled that since the House had not been restrained from conducting election, voting could go on and that whoever was aggrieved, could seek redress in court.
The ruling, however, divided the house. Whilst AwulaeAnnorAdjaye, Attibrukusu and Nana Kwesi Agyemang urged the House to postpone the election to a different date until the House was properly briefed with regards to the motion, HimaDekyi, Angamatuo Gyan and Tetreteh and Agyefi Kwame would not buy into their colleague’s advice that the election should be postponed.
The Deputy Regional Director for the Electoral Commission (EC) then intervened and announced to the meeting that he had been informed and directed by the Registrar of the House that the Electoral College was going to be ten, instead of eleven since AwulaeAmihereKpanyile (respondent) was not going to be part of the process.
By the disqualification of AmihereKpanyile from contesting the presidency of the House, TetrettehOkuamoahSekyim was going unopposed, as the sole candidate. For that reason, the election would be for the position of only Vice president and membership into the National House of Chiefs.
At this stage, AwulaeAttibrukusu, OsabarimaKwawEntsie, Nana Kwesi Agyemang, as well as AwulaeAnnorAdjaye walked out of the floor leaving AwulaeAgyefi Kwame, Angamatuo Gyan, TetrettehOkuamoahSekyim, HimaDekyi and Nana Kobina Nketsia V inside.
RESULTS DECLARATION
At the end of voting, OkuamoahSekyim secured 4 votes to emerge as president whilst Angamatuo Gyan secured 4 votes to also emerge as Vice president.
Present at the meeting was Agyefi Kwame II, Nsein;AwulaeAttibrukusu II, Lower Axim; Nana Kwesi Agyemang XI, Lower Dixcove;AwulaeAngamatuo Gyan III, Gwira; Nana Kobina Nketsia V, Essikado and OsabarimaKwawEntsie II, Mpohor.
The rest are TetrettehOkuamoahSekyim, WassaAkropong; Nana HimaDekyi XIV, Upper Dixcove; Nana KwamenaWienu II, Shama; Nana Nyamekeh II, Ajomoro;BarimaEkowGyesa II, Sekondi and Nana Kwesi Attobrah, WassaFiase.
HIGH COURT ACTION
Worried by his disqualification from contesting the Presidency of the House, the aggrieved paramount chief filed an application for certiorari to quash the election results as declared by the EC on October 6, 2020.
The certiorari application had the Registrar of the WRHC as 1st respondent, the Regional Director of the EC as 2nd respondent and TetrettehOkuamoahSekyim, Omanhene of WassaAkropong, as the 3rd respondent.
After hearing the application, the Sekondi High Court, presided over by Cynthia Wiredu (Mrs), quashed the results of the election.
She further ordered the EC to conduct a fresh election permitting all the candidates who had offered themselves, prior to the 6th October 2020, to stand for election.
STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
Now, following the Sekondi High Court verdict to quash the results of the WRHC election, TetrettehOkuamoahSekyim, who was a respondent in the certiorari application also filed for a stay of execution of the High Court at the Court of Appeal.
Until the stay was determined by the Appeal Court, the WRHC would not be able to convene a meeting.
Read Full Story
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Instagram
Google+
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS