STATEMENT BY THE REGENT OF BAWKU IN RESPONSE TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PURPORTED KUSAUG TRADITIONAL COUNCIL AND RECENT THREATS TO PEACE IN BAWKU

17th January, 2022

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, fellow Ghanaians, we thank you for honouring our invitation to cover this press statement.

Our attention has been drawn to a statement read by Ajingiri Abilla (Thomas Abilla) on behalf of Aninchema Abugrago Azoka dated 13th January 2022. We have noted with great concern that the statement is not only filled with inaccuracies and palpable falsehood but also contain scathing attacks on the person of His Royal Highness, the Nayiri, Naa Bohagu Mahami Abdulai Sheriga II who is the Overlord of the Great Mamprugu Kingdom. 

As children of HRH the Nayiri, and as part of our quest to stay on the path of truth and in the spirit of peace to present a true picture of happenings in Bawku to Ghanaians, we deem it very necessary to respond to the statement and address the inaccuracies/falsehoods presented by Thomas Abilla on behalf of Aninchema Abugrago Azoka and the Kusasis. 

THE RECENT CONFLICT IN BAWKU 

First, it is very important to state clearly and emphasize that, not once in the history of the recurring conflict in Bawku has it ever been the case that Mamprusis are the aggressors. Not once has it ever been the case that we Mamprusis threaten mayhem or violence whenever the Kusasis, have their annual samanpiid festival or any traditional ceremonies for that matter. Indeed, it must be stated that on the contrary, until the NPP administration of H. E. John Agyekum Kuffuor, it was often the Mamprusis who had to go through hell under the hands of the Kusasis just to celebrate our annual Damba Festival. 

We kindly urge Ghanaians to begin to ask questions why, whenever Mamprusis plan to celebrate their annual festival or most importantly perform the funeral of the late 14th Bawku Naba Naa Tampuri Alhaji Adam Zangbeogo of blessed memory, there is always a direct threat from the Kusasis followed by firing of gun shots, often leading to ethnic conflict. These threats as we can all witness in this most recent armed conflict have always been carried out regardless. 

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, we need to re-emphasize that Mamprusis have endured suppression from various governments through state institutions like the police and and local government authority while the aggressors, the kusasis, continue to carry out their threats. Yet the Kusasis always shamelessly blame and accuse Mamprusis for their own evil acts in Bawku. Enough is enough.Another question Ghanaians should be asking is why the funeral of the late 14th Bawku-Naba, a man the Kusasis describe as a certain Adam Zangbeo should be a source of worry to them. We have no doubt that any objective minded person who is conscious of the recent happenings in Bawku would agree that the kusasis have exposed themselves here and proved that their constant threats to carry out violence even in the face of taking human life was actualised. Ghanaians should ask themselves why a people who want to perform a funeral of their late chief, would perpetrate violence. Of what benefit will that be? Ladies and gentlemen, it is worth noting that the security services are well grounded in Bawku and if truth be told, they can tell Ghanaians where the gunshots that erupted in Bawku came from. 

Also, as stated earlier, the statement by the Kusasis sought to impugn the integrity of the Nayiri by indicting his Royal Highness in the recent violence in Bawku. For a people to constantly threaten and perpetrate violence all these years to turn around and try to blame the King is telling on the character of these shameless blood thirsty bunch of ingrates. Ghanaians, should ask them these questions. 

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when the two Mamprusi boys were accosted and gruesomely butchered not in Bawku but Bugri corner by Kusasis?

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when Kusasi bandits accosted and shot a commercial vehicle driver around Pusiga?

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when Kusasi youth rode motobikes, trailed, shot and killed a moshie cargo truck driver enroute to Tamale at Bazua?

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when same kusasi bandits rode a motorbike in search of another moshie man they believe is a mamprusi sympathiser and in their frustrations shot his wife?

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when two mamprusi men were shot in broad day light around the Total filling station area as they went about their business?

• Was the Nayiri mentioned when most recently, another moshie man (Awudu Welder) was shot by Kusasi boys after attending a funeral around Amadu Dori street?

The fatherly, peace loving, nature of HRH the Nayiri is no doubt in the minds of every Ghanaian and the sooner the Kusasis desist from trying to drag his name into the mud, the better for them. The Nayiri’s name will NOT be dragged in the mud. Those who are happy in the mud can stay there.

BAWKU SKIN DISPUTE 

It is very telling that the Self-proclaimed Kusasis in their statement hinged their claim to the Bawku skin on the 1958 Opoku Afari Commission, 1958 Appeal Court's ruling, and the 2003 Supreme Court case. This is enough to tell all and sundry that their claim to the Bawku skin has no foundation since all those cases cited fall flat in relation to the Bawku skin. 

For instance, 

1. The politically motivated 1958 Opoku Afari Commission’s report was quashed by the High Court ruling in 1958 in favour of we the Mamprusis (The original Chiefs of Bawku). Similarly, the 1958 Appeal Court's decision was a travesty of justice since the Mamprusis did not get to defend themselves in court because the then 13th Bawku Naba Naa Yirimea Mahama who was the defendant was exiled before the Appeals Court called the case. Furthermore, the Appeals Court ruling which constituted a travesty of justice was quashed by NLCD 112 which normalized the situation in favour of Mamprusis together with other over 500 chiefs across the country who were unjustly destooled/deskinned. 

2. In the 2003 Supreme Court case, it is interesting that these Self-proclaimed Kusasis, apparently, have come to terms with the fact that there was NO ruling on who the rightful owner of the Bawku Skin is. This explains why their statement said "In 2003, the Supreme Court of Ghana, declined the Mamprusis leave to apply to it under articles 270 and 277 of the 1992 constitution" instead of their usual false rhetoric that the court declared them rightful owners of the Bawku skin. Certainly, this obviously does not state that the Self-proclaimed Kusasis are the owners of the skin and any attempt to make such assertion will constitute interpreting the ruling by the Justices which is the sole prerogative of the Supreme Court. 

3. It is also interesting how they have conveniently left out the PNDCL 75 in their quote because they know that was the law that legitimized Aninchema Azoka but was now repealed by Act 516. As such the foundation upon which they claimed ownership of the Bawku skin is not in existence.

4. What is rather bizarre is the loud silence of the Kusasis on two landmark rulings on the Bawku Skin by Ghana’s National House of Chiefs.  Mamprusis have had two landmark rulings in our favour which the Kusasis conveniently left out in their statement. Ghanaians should be asking why among the several rulings on the Bawku Skin issues, they find it convenient to mention ONLY the 1958 Opoku Afari Commission, 1958 Appeal Court's ruling, and the 2003 Supreme Court case while leaving out the 1980 High Court ruling and 1983 rulings by the National House of Chiefs, the legally mandated body to see to chieftaincy matters? It is instructive to note that:

5. In 1983 the National House of Chiefs ruled clearly and stating with no ambiguity that Mamprusis are rightful owners of the Bawku skin. The ruling did not end there. It went further to describe the kusasi claimant to the Bawku skin as a COMMONER and has no ties or relation whatsoever to the Bawku skin. How then, can such a person, or his assigns, transform from a “COMMONER” into a Royal. No wonder Aninchema has to constantly find solace in getting a voter hungry president to affirm to him that he is indeed a chief of Bawku. How laughable.

6. Prior to the ruling by the National House of Chiefs in favour of the Mamprusis, the High Court in 1980 had ruled restraining the Kusasi claimant (Abugrago Azoka) from acting as a chief. The court further stated that punitive measures should be taken against him (Abugrago Azoka) if he flouted the ruling. 

To every fair-minded Ghanaian, the National House of Chiefs is the constitutionally mandated body to deal with chieftaincy matters and we are glad that we have such rulings in our favour.  We are also glad that as it stands no court of competent jurisdiction has set aside these landmark judgments. 

It is also instructive to note, that Syme, whose writing the Kusasis, hold on to, so dearly, as their bible indicated they came to Bawku from Burkina Faso when Mamprusis had already established Bawku and ruled several hundreds of years before the arrival of the first Kusasis. The question again Ghanaians should be asking is how these people, can all of a sudden transform themselves into owners of the Bawku skin. 

ATTEMPT BY SELF-PROCLAIMED KUSASIS TO IMPLICATE HRH THE NAYIRI IN THE BAWKU CRISIS AND EQUATE ANINCHEMA ABUGRAGO WITH HRH THE NAYIRI.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, there is a saying that " When a billy goat is overfed, it challenges the Lion to a fight". It is shocking that Ajingiri Abilla (Thomas Abilla) who originally is a Mossi man would read such a denigrating press statement directed at his grandfather the Nayiri and portions of which claims "Bawku is not part of Mamprugu" and that "the (Nayiri) is equal in status to Aninchema Abugrago" 

We treat this attempt to denigrate the Nayiri with the contempt it deserves. We urge Thomas Abilla to tell his paymaster, Aninchema about the Mamprugu Kingdom of which moshies are a core part of. The kusasis claim they have respected the Nayiri over the years. Meanwhile, through their words and deeds, we know this is false. Otherwise, they would not for all these years usurp a skin with the Nayiri as kingmaker. The words and deeds of the Nayiri on the Bawku issues shows nothing but a father constantly preaching peace and patience to his people in Bawku including the Kusasis. The first attempt at equating Aninchema to the Nayiri was when in one such calls for cool heads over the Bawku crisis, the Nayiri, in a fatherly fashion referred to all sides in Bawku as his children. The Kusasis in their aggressor fashion strongly refused to be called children of the Nayiri and equated Aninchema to the Nayiri.

The Nayiri refuses to be provoked by the myopic mindedness of the kusasis. We wish to remind the Kusasis that

a. Bawku was founded by Mamprusis dating back to the 17th century and is an integral part of Mamprugu

b. Kusasis can continue to tickle themselves and laugh about the status of a “COMMONER” whom they have never been able to respond to evidence to the fact that he is not even Kusasi but Yanga

The peace-loving nature of the Nayiri is unquestionable and Ghana knows the role he plays and continue to play in building a peaceful nation where everyone can coexist regardless of tribe or ethnic affiliation

SELF-PROCLAIMED KUSASI USURPATION, IDENTITY CRISIS, AND CONTRADICTORY ORIGINAL.

The Self-proclaimed Kusasis in a failed attempt claim that the situation in Bawku is akin to 'Apartheid'. We will like to tell them that they are rather those who have usurped the over 300 years chieftaincy institution of Mamprusis in Bawku and its environs and instituted an apartheid regime by seizing of Mamprusis farmlands and businesses through violence. Gradually, the whole world is getting to know how the self-proclaimed Kusasis are usurpers and not fit to inherit chieftaincy they have no lineage or association with. 

The Kusasis, in their oral narration of how they came to existence through Syme’s writings, said they fell from the sky. Then in a clear case of identity crisis, the kusasis have struggled through their self-seeking intellectuals to get an origin for themselves. They felt the easiest way to legitimize their false claim of ownership of Bawku which is part of Naa Gbewaa's Kingdom is to claim they are also descendants of Naa Gbewaa. They pushed this failed agenda even though they knew it was not true. They have not been able to answer this simple question.  Which of Naa Gbewaa's children can they trace their descendancy? 

Ladies and gentlemen, as recent as November 2021, Patrick Adakudgu speaking in an official capacity on behalf of Aninchema Abugrago at the latter's house ridiculously said to DJ Parara's crew that 'some' of 'their people' had traced their links together with Mamprusis to Naa Gbewaa. The question is, how can some Self-proclaimed Kusasis be descendants of Naa Gbewaa and others are not? He further claimed a common ancestor between Mamprusis and Kusasis because their languages are similar. 

But in their recent press statement read on behalf of Aninchema Abugrago, they dispelled any linkage between Mamprusis and Kusasis saying they are not the same people and that they never speak the same language. This is how cunning, treacherous but most importantly, confused these people are and it only takes special grace from God to expose their contradictions just as is evident here. 

THREATS TO PEACE 

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, fellow Ghanaians, it is troubling that the entire Self-proclaimed Kusasis will attribute the threats to peace in Bawku to an anonymous Facebook account (Bawku Links) and also Naa Tampuri. Hypocritical as they are, they have conveniently not mentioned their numerous Facebook accounts like the Kusasi Voice Association which has identifiable people preaching hate and violence on social media. They have also failed to mention Bawku Quick and other social media accounts continually preaching hate and violence against Mamprusis in Bawku.  In addition, instead of falsely accusing peace-loving people like Naa Tampuri, the Kusasi elders should have indicted the Kusasi Professor Akeya Agbango for his inciting role in the recent conflicts. Prof Agbango who is not originally from Bawku but a migrant from Biengu in Burkina Faso gained notoriety by poking his nose into Bawku skin matters through inciting Kusasi youth to violence. It is the likes of Prof Agbango who have absolutely nothing in common with the Bawku skin that should be blamed for their hateful and inciting roles. The likes of Nurudeen Mohammed, a Kusasi and joynews reporter who also runs a social media page called The Nurudeen Report, organised and interviewed the said professor Agbango to make such incendiary and unprovoked comments aimed at provoking peace loving Mamprusis in Bawku. 

We call them out and they should bow their heads in shame for such acts of recklessness. Other clear and present threats to peace in Bawku include the following:

1. Attempts to unlawfully open up satellite markets in Kusasi settlements in Bawku without prior approval from the Bawku Municipal Assembly. In an audio voice, Aninchema Abugrago is heard with impunity instructing and providing land to kusasis to start unapproved markets. This is lawlessness and a recipe for chaos.

2. The forceful and militant methods of preventing people particularly of other tribes like Bissas living at the outskirts from accessing the main Bawku Central Market for business. This is clear lawlessness and impunity on the part of Kusasis. Kusasi bandits come out with arms and openly stop people who desire to do business in the Bawku township. This is a serious security threat that needs immediate attention.

3. It is this same impunity and self-entitlement of the kusasis that has caused Kusasi youth to shoot and attack Mamprusis simply because they think Mamprusis are performing a funeral. 

4. Banditry, continuous setting up of roadblocks and attacking innocent road users who go to and fro the Bawku township whether they are Mamprusis, Mossis, Hausa, Bissas, etc. The case of the killing of an innocent driver who was traveling in a Tamale bound cargo truck, as well as the shooting of another driver on the Widana road, are a few examples.

5. The continued prevention of some Mamprusis from accessing their farmlands by Kusasis. This issue has existed for some years now and is yet to be addressed by the Government/Security agencies or the Bawku Inter-Ethnic Peace Committee.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, we believe strongly that every person who is not a Mamprusi in Bawku, as well as the security agencies, will attest to our continued commitment to peace in Bawku. 

In this regard, we will like to state the following as recommendations to ensure lasting peace:

1. We call on Government to enforce the 1983 National House of Chiefs ruling which categorically stated Mamprusis as the rightful owners of the Bawku skin. As the only body clothed with the power to deal with chieftaincy matters, we believe strongly that this ruling by the National House of Chiefs is more than sufficient to solve the Bawku skin dispute. This explains why the Kusasis in their press statement are vehemently opposed to the idea of setting up a commission of inquiry to look into the matter because they know they will be exposed. 

2. Government should also enforce the 1980 High Court ruling which restrained Abugrago Aninchema and by extension the Kusasis from presenting themselves as ‘chiefs. 

3. The security should with immediate effect set up road checkpoints along the Bawku Bolga and Bawku Pulimakom Road to tackle the banditry perpetrated by Kusasi youth. We are saying this because the continued action of these bandits will escalate the situation and we do not want to be blamed if we react in equal measure.

4.  The security agencies should with immediate effect ensure that no one is blocked or stopped from accessing the Bawku Central Market. The Kusasis have no right to terrorize innocent people simply because they want to access the Bawku Central market. If they think their markets are sustainable then they should allow traders to freely choose where they prefer to trade their goods.

CONCLUSION

We wish to thank the security agencies for the continued sacrifices, courage and support in keeping the peace. I call on all other ethnic groups in Bawku to continue to remain calm even in the face of provocation and attempts to prevent you from going about your normal businesses. 

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press, we once again wish to thank you very much for honouring our call and providing a platform to shine light on the truth. It is our hope that you will help send our message to the good people of Ghana and also all relevant stakeholders and authorities as we continue to work towards bringing lasting peace to Bawku.

SIGNED

Alhaji Ibrahim Adam Zangbeogo (Regent)

For further correspondence please contact: