Odeneho Kwasi Peprah II, Chief of Ayanfuri in the Central region, has requested the Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands to furnish him with a statement of accounts of all revenue accrued from mining operations of Perseus Mining Company at Ayanfuri.
The chief has also demanded the Ayanfuri Stool’s share of the accumulated mineral royalties to enable him initiate development projects at Ayanfuri.
The request was made per a letter dated September 18, 2023 to the Regional officer of the Administrator of Stool lands at Cape Coast and copied to Administrator of Stool Lands, President and Registrar of the National House of Chiefs, Acting President of the Denkyira Traditional Council, the Divisional Police Commander, Dunkwa, and the District Chief Executive of Upper Denkyira West Assembly.
The basis of his request is that he is the legally recognised chief of Ayanfuri on the strength of two High Court decisions of December 22, 1989 and May 5, 1990 which he claims have not been set aside on appeal.
On December 22, 1989 a Cape Coast High Court, presided over by Justice J.A. Kpegah quashed the decision of the Denkyira Traditional Council, thereby destooling Nana Peprah.
The court also prohibited the Traditional Council from denying Nana Peprah his seat in the Traditional Council.
On May 5, 1990 His Lordship, Justice A.A. Benin, presiding, also disallowed an application for stay of execution and awarded a cost of GHC3,000 for the applicant/respondent (Nana Peprah).
Despite these two decisions, the Denkyira Traditional Council claims the Ayanfuri stool is vacant, even though Nana Peprah’s kingmakers, from whom he derives his authority have not destooled him judicially.
But Nana Peprah claims the removal of his name from the National Register of Chiefs by the National House of Chiefs is purely administrative and not judicial.
He further explained that Section 40 (2) of the Chieftaincy Act (2008) Act 759 provides that “a Traditional Council shall not declare a chief liable to be deposed without judicial process”.
The embattled chief argued that democracy thrives on the rule of law and that the laws of the land must be respected.
He claims he has the authority to function as a chief in the face of the legal actions and called for the payments of the accumulated mineral royalties to enable him embark on development projects for the community.
