The Court of Appeal in Accra has upheld the ruling of the High Court, Sogakope, affirming the validity of the enstoolment of Sylvanus Chartey Kumahor, now deceased, as Togbe Adontsiri VI and Kennedy Kumahor, his successor, as Togbe Adontsiri VII.
The appellate court, in its judgement delivered on December 19, 2024, dismissed a challenge brought by Wilson Kudze, who sought to nullify an earlier arbitration ruling on the matter.
This was contained in a statement signed by Hlortator Lord Gati, counsel for the respondents, and released to the Ghana News Agency, in Accra, on Thursday.
The court ruled that the dispute fell within the jurisdiction of the judicial committees responsible for chieftaincy affairs and, therefore, could not be determined by the Court of Appeal.
The case traces its origins to a ruling by the Arbitration Court of the Fiaga of Tefle, Togbe Nakakpo Dugabaza VIII, on June 15, 2014.
That ruling confirmed that Sylvanus Chartey Kumahor, now deceased, had been validly enstooled as Togbe Adontsiri VI. Kudze, however, also laid claim to the title, disputing the legitimacy of Kumahor’s enstoolment.
Seeking to overturn the arbitration decision, Kudze initiated legal action at the High Court, Sogakope, arguing that the arbitration ruling should be declared null and void.
However, in its judgement delivered on March 17, 2023, the High Court dismissed the case, ruling that chieftaincy disputes are not within its jurisdiction.
The court stated that such matters are to be resolved by the appropriate judicial committees established to handle chieftaincy affairs.
Kudze, subsequently, took the matter to the Court of Appeal, urging the court to set aside the decision of the High Court and invalidate the arbitration ruling.
However, the appellate court upheld the High Court’s decision, reaffirming that the case was a chieftaincy matter that must be determined through the proper customary and judicial structures.
The judgement brings further legal clarity to the long-standing dispute, reaffirming that the authority over such matters rests within the chieftaincy institutions rather than the conventional courts.
