GBEWAA ZULIYA FEEDS

Rev Azumah who has hurriedly scribbled a reply to my rejoinder reminds me of the wise saying that “If God wants good for you, He makes your adversary present with clear falsehoods and contrived arguments”. This is the state Rev Azumah finds himself in and it is obvious that he is bitter my rejoinder has collapsed the several years of falsehoods they have fed their youth and unsuspecting Ghanaians. All the issues he raised in his reply have been sufficiently answered in my two-part rejoinder to his initial article and he would have realized this if he was one of the "careful readers" I kept on addressing. But to make things further clearer to him, I say: 1. Is it not surprising that Rev Azumah whose entire 2 parts article in which he sought to authoritatively re-write history never quoted a single reference book on history (not to even talk of page numbers) is now drawing knives and daggers claiming I did not reference page numbers of the books I quoted from? How preposterous?

From the discussions in Part One (1), it becomes abundantly clear that the attempt by Rev Azumah to latch onto the self contradictory and political findings/ conclusions of the 1958 Opoku Afari Committee is unsustainable. For instance, the committee after acknowledging that the customary law, customs and traditions pertaining to the Bawku chieftaincy since the time of Naa Ali until the time of the inquiry (1721 - 1958) was that Mamprusis were chiefs with the Nayiri as King maker, it made the bizaare contradictory conclusion that Abugrago Azoka was validly elected as chief of Bawku per the "customs and traditions". This was despite the fact that Abugrago Azoka was not a Mamprusi neither was he enskinned by the King maker, Nayiri. Furthermore, not only was the so-called election of Abugrago Azoka against the customs and traditions, it was actually an illegality against the law at the time (State Councils Ordinance).  Also, the committee after acknowledging the fact that Naa Ali

PART ONE (1) I have read an opinion piece written by one Rev Prof John Azumah published in two parts on the 7 and 8 March 2023 editions of Daily Graphic titled "Bawku Conflict: Truth Must Be Told". As a native of Bawku who has witnessed various stages of the conflict (violent and restive periods) since the 80s as a child, I have always maintained that the Bawku conflict is probably the most misunderstood and misrepresented dispute in Ghana. This, in my opinion, explains why the Government and other major stakeholders are having great difficulty in finding a lasting solution to the problem.  Thus, it was very refreshing to see Rev Azumah choose "telling the truth" as the title for his piece. But did he really narrate the truth? And what is the truth? These questions will be the focus of this rejoinder and to make it easier for the reader to do a comparative analysis of the issues raised by Rev Azumah and this article, I have chosen to structure this rejoi