History, Representation, and Traditional Identity in Bawku Traditional Area: Contextualizing the Kusasi Majoritarian Claim

The Bawku Traditional Area in northern Ghana is a region rich in cultural diversity, historical heritage, and longstanding traditions. Historically governed under the broader jurisdiction of the Mamprugu Kingdom, Bawku has been home to several ethnic groups who have coexisted for centuries, including the Mamprusi, Kusasi, Bissa, Moshie, Bimoba, and Talensi. Yet, in recent years, political and social tensions have arisen over claims to representation, traditional authority, and territorial designation, with particular focus on the Kusasi community’s assertion of majority status and the push to rebrand or rename the region as the “Kusaug Area.” This article explores the historical and political structures underpinning Bawku's traditional governance and examines the implications of such claims within Ghana’s broader democratic framework.

Historical Background of Bawku in the Mamprugu Kingdom

The Mamprugu Kingdom, one of the oldest traditional states in Ghana, historically governed Bawku and the surrounding areas through a chieftaincy system that incorporated multiple ethnic groups under the leadership of the Mamprusi chiefs. According to oral history and colonial-era records, the area now recognized as Bawku was and still is a well-integrated segment of the Mamprugu Kingdom, with administrative practices that included diverse ethnic representation.

Prior to and during British colonial rule, Bawku was known as part of the Mamprugu domain. The British, however, implemented a system of indirect rule that altered local governance by creating distinct administrative boundaries. These boundaries reinforced ethnic distinctions within Bawku that continue to impact the region's socio-political landscape to this day. The established traditional governance structure and practice was such that; in Kusasi villages of Pusiga, Binaba and Kusanaba, Kusasi Tendanas were enskinned as chiefs of these villages, in Tempane, a Nabdam was enskinned the chief of the village, a Moshie was enskinned the chief of Moshie Village of Kugri, Kulungungu and Garu had Bissa chiefs, Timoni a Kasen village had a Kasena as chief and Mamprusi villages of Bawku, Sinnebaga, Binduri, Worikambo, Tanga, and Teshi, had Mamprusi chiefs. All these chiefs in all the villages were directly enskinned by the Nayiri, until the British administrative and traditional restructure.

Colonial Restructuring the Bawku Traditional Area

Traditionally, the British Colonial government altered the governance structure of the Mamprugu kingdom, particularly, and not limited to Bawku traditional area; all chiefs in the Bawku enclave were enskinned directly by the Nayiri as stated earlier, until 1932 when the British colonial administration advised the Nayiri to decentralize his administrative appointing power to one of his chiefs as the head of the Bawku District. This advice was for administrative convenience of the British indirect rule. All the Mamprusi and canton (canton means a ruler of a small administrative division) chiefs met in Nalerigu at the invitation of the Nayiri. At Nalerigu, the chiefs all nominated and settled on Bawku Naaba, Naa Wuni Bugri Saa, the 12^th Bawku Naaba as their preferred choice of their leader. Bawku Naaba Bugri Saa was enskinned by the Nayiri, so he could in also enskin the other chiefs. This formed the basis on which the Nayiri does not enskin the other chiefs of the Bawku traditional area any longer, except the Bawku Naaba. This practice was later objected by some chiefs who felt less superior because the Nayiri was not the one enskinning them, but their concerns were addressed by the Nayiri, Naa Sheriga Abdulai Mahami, so the 1932 colonial government arrangements was maintained.

Following Ghana's independence, Bawku became a focal point of political maneuvering. Nkrumah’s Convention People’s Party (CPP) had performed poorly in the Northern Territories in the 1954 elections, largely due to the Nayiri’s support for the Northern People’s Party (NPP). In response, the CPP government, led by Nkrumah, initiated efforts to diminish the Nayiri’s influence by fragmenting the Mamprugu Kingdom into smaller units, ultimately dividing it into the Frafra, Kusasi, and South Mamprugu districts. This politically motivated division marked the beginning of the Bawku chieftaincy conflict. Some elements in the Bawku Traditional Area began promoting the area as “Kusaug” in reference to the Kusasi ethnic majority claim in some parts of the area.

Colonial Administrative Changes and the Emergence of Ethnic Claims

The British colonial administration sought to restructure traditional governance across northern Ghana. In Bawku, this involved designating certain areas by ethnic majority, thus formalizing distinctions between groups that previously operated under shared governance. Although the Mamprusi retained influence over traditional leadership, the British administration recognized Kusasi chiefs in some communities, contributing to a gradual perception of separate ethnic territories within Bawku.

Despite these changes, the Bawku area remained officially recognized as part of the Mamprugu Kingdom until Ghana’s independence in 1957, and the name “Kusaug” was never formally used in any colonial or post-colonial documents related to Bawku. It was, and remains known as the “Bawku Traditional Area,” a designation that properly reflects its multi-ethnic composition.

Contemporary Claims and the Issue of “Kusaug”

In recent years, some Kusasi leaders have started an illegality by referring to the Bawku area as the “Kusaug Traditional Area,” reflecting their claim to a majority presence in the area. This move, however, has generated opposition among other ethnic groups, particularly the Mamprusi, who argue that renaming the area undermines the multi-ethnic heritage of Bawku. Critics view the term “Kusaug” as historically unfounded, emphasizing that no official or traditional authority has ever designated Bawku as such. With the explicit and tacit approval of government, this grand deception and illegality of ‘’Kusaug traditional area’’ emerged around 2020 to the dismay of all ethnic groups within the area.

While the Kusasi constitute a significant portion of area’s population, renaming the area as “Kusaug” a complete disregard to the historical role and rights of other ethnic communities, including the Bissa, Mamprusi, Moshie, Bimoba, and Talensi, who continue to see themselves as integral members of Bawku’s social and traditional fabric, and by extension the Bawku traditional area of Mamprugu kingdom. For instance; Bissaku Youth Movement in Bawku traditional area; in Kumasi, issued a press statement on 3^rd November, 2024 and posits very interesting factual statements which include; ‘’Our attention has been drawn Emmanuel Habuka Bombande reckless statement on GTV recently, and we, the Bissa Youth of the Bawku Traditional Area, disassociate ourselves from him and condemn the Kusasi criminal association for killing innocent Bissas in the name of Bawku conflict’’. This quote is from the Bissaku Youth Movement, appropriately referred to the area as Bawku Traditional Area and not ‘’Kusaug Traditional Area’’. All other ethnic groups in the area so properly refer to the area as Bawku Traditional Area. Where then lies the basis and legitimacy of this Kusaug Area?

In contextualizing the dynamic area of the area, post-independence Ghana established six administrative districts within the Bawku area, aligning with the country’s democratic and governance framework. These districts, each with distinct ethnic compositions and historical backgrounds, aim to reflect the region's demographic and cultural diversity. It is however, worrying that some elements within the area will embark on self-aggrandizement, and perpetuate this traditional and legal dishonesty by referring to the area as Kusaug. The current administrative districts include:

1. Bawku Municipal District: Predominantly Mamprusi communities, located in the heart of Bawku, which also serves as the administrative hub. Bawku has always belonged to the Mamprusi before, during and post-colonial rule. The other ethnic groups such as; Moshie, Bissa, Nabdam, live in harmony in the area.

2. Garu District: Primarily home to the Bissa community, this district reflects the presence of one of the area’s long-standing ethnic groups. It also constitutes the other ethnic groups; such Mamprusi, Kusasi, Nabdam, Moshie, Bimoba among others, live together peacefully.

3. Zebilla District: Primarily inhabited by Talensi communities, representing another essential component of the Bawku region, with Kusasis and the other ethnic groups.

4. Pusiga District: A diverse district with significant representation of the Kusasi and other ethnic groups, is part of Mamprugu kingdom in the Bawku Traditional Area.

5. Binduri District: Also, a mixed district, is Mamprusi dominated featuring a range of ethnic communities including, Kusasi, Mossi, Bissa and others.

6. Tempane District: Another multi-ethnic area with a substantial Bissa and Nabdam population alongside the other ethnic groups.

Each of these constituencies is part of the larger Bawku Traditional Area, acknowledging the shared history and interwoven identities of the ethnic groups within the region. By maintaining this arrangement, Ghana’s electoral system acknowledges the diverse composition of Bawku, which despite its ethnic complexities, has traditionally operated under a unified traditional framework; the Bawku Traditional Area under the Mamprugu Traditional Area.

Conclusion
In preserving the Legacy of the Bawku Traditional Area, the debate over renaming Bawku underscores deeper issues of identity, history, and governance in multi-ethnic regions of Ghana. While demographic shifts and political changes are inevitable, there remains a need to honour the historical structures and traditions that have fostered coexistence in Bawku.

Additionally, by maintaining the Bawku Traditional Area as an inclusive designation, respects the contributions of all ethnic groups within the region. As Ghana continues to uphold democratic values of inclusion and equality, it is crucial that any decisions regarding traditional titles or boundaries in Bawku are made in consultation with all stakeholders, ensuring that the area's rich and shared heritage is preserved for future generations. Therefore, these historical and administrative recognition of Bawku as a shared traditional area underscores the importance of inclusive decision-making when addressing new claims to identity and territorial designation.

By: Salifu Hamza Iddrisu

   Comments2