The National House of Chiefs is under a 14-day ultimatum to reverse the expungement of the name of Ga Mantse, Nii Tackie Adama Latse ll, from the register of the NHC.
The ultimatum is from a Kumasi High Court which also slapped a Ghc25,000 cost on the NHC which was respondent in a mandamus case filed by the Ga Mantse.
“I hereby order the restoration of the name of the Applicant, Nii Tackie Adama Latse II, into the Register of Chiefs at the National House of Chiefs by the Respondent and its Registrar within 14 days from today. For the avoidance of doubt, on or before the 25th November 2021”, His Lordship Justice Frederick Tetteh ruled.
The order follows an instant application brought against the NHC by Nii Tackie Adama Latse II for expunging his name from the NHC’s register as the Ga Manste
The NHC must comply by 25 November or risk being in contempt of the court.
Stating his case, Nii Tackie Adama Latse II, said the NHC’s expungement of his name was unlawfully, unjustifiably and tantamount to acting ultra vires.
He narrates that he had been duly nominated, vetted and then enstooled as the Ga Mantse before his name was entered into the National Register of Chiefs as the legitimate Ga Mantse on the 24th April 2015.
Thenceforth, he has been performing his duties both administratively and customarily and was even elected by the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs as one of its five representatives to the National House of Chiefs and were to be inducted on November 12 same year.
However, on November 10, 2020 one Nii Tetteh Ashong V, caused an application for prohibition to be filed against him and that, on March 29, 2021 the High Court in Kumasi granted the prohibition order on the grounds that the ambiguity of who the actual Ga Mantse is should be determined by the appropriate a body before the induction of legitimate Ga Mantse.
Plaintiff said that the NHC prohibited him from the induction, pending the final resolution of the ambiguity about who the Ga Mantse is as a result of the claim by his rival.
He lamented that all efforts made to have his name re-entered into the National Register of House of Chiefs have proven futile, even though he has never misconducted himself, abdicated nor have been destooled by the Kingmakers of the Ga State.
In its defense, the NHC argued that its act of removal and or entry of names into the Register of Chiefs do not constitute adjudication and to that extent, the same is not amenable to the writ of mandamus.
It argued further that it acted on an order directed at it by another High Court and further stated that the matters of chieftaincy lies within the purview of the Supreme Court since the High Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the instant application.