A self-styled chief of Hwakpo whose request to the Ada Paramountcy for enstoolment has been rejected after thorough investigations by a committee of eminent chiefs constituted by the Ada Paramountcy, has run to the high court against the paramount chief who has the sole traditional power to determine the status of chiefs in the Ada area.
However, the Ada Paramountcy has prayed the court to refuse the application as it lacks accuracy and legal bases.
Hakpo Adi Buertey Puplampo who is from the Puplampo family petitioned the Ada Paramountcy against the Ackwerh family known to be the first settlers and owners of the Hwakpo lands.
The Ackwerh’s from the Dangmebiawe of Ada have always alluded to the fact that the Hwakpo land was bequeathed to their Great Grandmother as a compensation for allowing herself to be taken into servitude to service as a “Trokoshi” in compensation for some sins committed by the Adibeawe clan of Ada. Since then, the Hwakpo community was established and for decades the Ackweh’s have ascended the Hwakpo stool until recently some members of the Puplampu family led by one Hakpo Adi Buertey Puplampo from Adibeawe begin to laying claim to the stool.
Elders of the community who say they were being terrorized by Hakpo Adi Buertey pleaded with the Ackwerhs to take their rightful position.
They further petitioned the Ada Paramountcy to determine the true owners of the Hwakpo stool.
The Ada Paramountcy constituted a committee of eminent chiefs to go into the matter and determine the true stool owners.
The committee upon several engagements with both side and investigations, determined that the Ackwerh’s are the true owners of the Hwakpo stool.
However, without further exhausting the chieftaincy arbitration system to the end, Adi Buertey Puplampo who is assuming the chieftaincy title has resulted to seek refuge with the High Court rather to the surprise of traditional and chieftaincy pundits.
Holding himself as the Chief of Hwakpo, Hakpo Adi Buertey Puplampo has sued the Paramount Chief of Ada, Nene Abram Akuaku III and Nomo George Akorsey Ackwerh, the Head of the Ackwerh family of the Dangmebiawe.
According to him, the decision taken by the committee of eminent chiefs which he equally subjected himself to is contrary to Section 29 of the Chieftaincy Act 2008, Act 759 and L.I798, 1972.
He accused the fact finding committee of assuming the functions of a Judicial Committee of a Traditional Council as established under the chieftaincy Act 2008, Act 759, contrary to law.
As part of a quick answer in a nineteen (19) bullet points to the affidavit filed on him, the Paramount through his council prayed the court to refuse the Application by the applicant as it lacks legal facts.
Among other lack of legal bases, the respondent noted that the fact finding committee was set up by the Ada Paramountcy and not the Traditional Council, and therefore it is not subject to Section 29 of the Chieftaincy Act 2008, Act 759 and L.I798, 1972.
The respondent again reminds the court that “the paramountcy has every right to seek advice from any person being capable of giving such advice and the Ada Paramountcy has every right to form a fact finding committee to look into facts as in the instance between the two contending families”.
The respondent again noted that ‘whatever findings the fact finding committee set up by the Ada Paramountcy made is advisory and not binding on the parties and as such the findings do not prevent any party from filling a petition at the Ada Traditional Council for a Judicial committee to be set up to adjudicate upon the matter.
The Paramount Chief through his council stating these amongst a nineteen bullet points, has prayed the court to refuse the application.