Ga Mantse case hottens up

KOJO's DIARY

THE Accra High Court will on February 14, 2007 determine whether or not the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs has jurisdiction to entertain four petitions brought before it against the enstoolment of Dr Jo Blankson as the Ga Mantse.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice K.A. Abada, fixed the date today after the completion of arguments in an application on notice for an order of certiorari and prohibition brought by Dr Blankson and his head of family, Nii Akropong III.
The action was against the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs and four interested parties, namely, Dr E.A. Tackie and three others, Winston Nii Teiko Tackie and two others, Nii Agyemankese IV and three others and Nii Owula Kpakpa Blofonyo, a sole petitioner.
That application is one of the issues before the courts in connection with the enstoolment of Dr Blankson last year by one of the ruling houses as the Ga Mantse, with the stool name King Tackie Tawiah III.
Earlier on Tuesday, another Accra High Court dismissed a motion for an order of contempt filed against Dr Jo Blankson and four others by some elders of the Teiko Tsuru We, one of the ruling houses of the Ga Stool.
The applicants brought the action to cite Dr Blankson and the head of his family, Nii Akropong, Numo Tettey and the James Town Mantse, Nii Kojo Ababio, for flouting an injunction against them by the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs at Dodowa to enstool Dr Blankson as Ga Mantse.
Nii Willie Amafio, counsel for Dr Blankson in his argument said while the petitions before the Regional House of Chiefs lacked merit, the House also did not have jurisdiction to entertain or deal with a patently incompetent matter such as the petition.
He said the House of Chiefs dealt with issues related to Chieftaincy and since the petitioners sued Dr Blankson in his personal capacity and not as King Tackie Tawiah III or the Ga Mantse, the petition against him was flawed and at the wrong place.
Similarly, he argued that in the case of Nii Akropong, he was a mere head of family and not a .
"If they had sued Dr Blankson as Ga Mantse then it would have made the House of Chiefs the appropriate forum for the petition, counsel stated and added that the co-respondent, Nii Akropong was also not a chief.
Nii Amafio said the petitioners also lacked the capacity of kingmakers of the Ga state to sue for destoolment and with regard to Dr Tackie and George Nii Tackie, two of the interested party, they contested in the nomination of the Ga Mantse and lost.
Therefore, he said, that stopped them from taking part in any such action.
In the course of the argument tempers flared when Nii Amafio linked Dr Tackie to the contest and said Dr Tackie prepared a Curriculum Vitae for his son to enable him to take part in the contest for the Ga Mantse.
That drew a sharp shout of "liar" from Dr Tackie who was seated in the crowd. The judge, however, calmed down tempers and threatened that the court was not a palace, therefore, anybody found in contempt of it would be sentenced to two days' imprisonment.
Reacting to the submissions, Mr A.G. Buadu, counsel for Nii Blofonyo prayed the court to dismiss the application because it was incompetent while the issue of capacity, referred to by counsel for the respondents, should be left with the appropriate adjudicating body to handle.
Mr Ben Akuette, counsel for Dr Tackie and others and Nii Tackie and others, said the petitions before the House of Chiefs were proper and within the jurisdiction of the House.
According to him, although Dr Blankson and Nii Akropong were not paramount chiefs they purported to have enstooled a Ga Mantse, and, therefore, the issue related to Chieftaincy.
"They attempted to elect a Ga Mantse and so the Regional House of Chiefs is the proper forum for the petitions", he told the court.
The Nii Agyemankese party was not represented in court.