Bawku Chieftaincy Dispute: Upholding History, Ensuring Justice

Introduction
The ongoing Bawku chieftaincy dispute has been marked by deep historical disagreements between the Mamprusi and Kusasi ethnic groups. However, a review of historical records, colonial accounts, and scholarly works affirms that Bawku and its chieftaincy were established by the Mamprusi under the authority of the Nayiri; King of Mamprugu. The dispute over Bawku’s rightful traditional ownership and authority should be examined with strict adherence to historical facts. This article presents historical evidence proving that Bawku town and its chieftaincy have always belonged to the Mamprusi and calls on the President of Ghana and the Otumfuo-led mediation committee to be guided by these facts in any resolution efforts.

Bawku’s Origins and Mamprusi Ownership

Bawku traces its origins to the early 17th century when it was established under the authority of the Nayiri, the King of Mamprugu. The historical foundations of the town are deeply rooted in Mamprusi rule, as evidenced by British anthropologist R. S. Rattray, who noted that “Bawk (Bawku) are really Mampruse, not Kusase, being founded by the ruling class” (Rattray, 1932, pp. 374-375). This assertion underscores the fact that Bawku was founded as part of Mamprugu’s territorial expansion and governance, placing it firmly within the Mamprusi chieftaincy structure.

The institution of chieftaincy and royalty, which serves as the basis for traditional governance in Bawku, has long been an integral aspect of Mamprusi political organization. Historically, the Nayiri, as the King of Mamprugu, appointed chiefs to oversee key settlements, including Bawku. This centralized system ensured that Bawku remained under the authority of the Mamprusi dynasty, with its governance tied to the broader Mamprugu polity.

On the other hand, historical accounts suggest that the Kusasi people did not traditionally practice centralized chieftaincy in the same way as the Mamprusi. The governance structures among the Kusasi were decentralized, with leadership often based on clan heads and elders rather than a system of enskinned chiefs. This historical distinction raises significant questions about the legitimacy of claims to the Bawku chieftaincy by the Kusasi.

Given these historical realities, any assertion that Bawku does not belong to the Mamprusi ruling dynasty contradicts well-documented historical records. The governance of Bawku has been historically linked to the Nayiri’s authority, and its place within the Mamprusi chieftaincy tradition remains a well-established historical fact.

Further reinforcing Bawku’s deep-rooted connection to Mamprugu, T. E. Hilton, in his Ghana Population Atlas (1962), identified Bawku as "North Mamprusi’s only real town" (Hilton, 1962). This designation is significant, as it underscores Bawku’s prominence within Mamprusi governance and settlement patterns before colonial intervention. Unlike other settlements within what is now referred to as the Bawku Traditional Area—where various ethnic groups are predominant—Bawku itself historically maintained a Mamprusi majority. This demographic reality further affirms its status as a central town within the Mamprusi chieftaincy system.

The reference to Bawku as "North Mamprusi’s only real town" is not just a demographic observation but also a reflection of its administrative and political importance within Mamprugu. In pre-colonial times, Bawku served as a strategic outpost for Mamprusi rule, reinforcing Nayiri’s influence in the northern frontier of the kingdom. As the Nayiri expanded his authority, Bawku evolved into a key settlement where Mamprusi chiefs, appointed by the Nayiri, exercised control over governance, trade, and security. The town’s status as a royal enclave distinguished it from surrounding settlements, where decentralized leadership structures among other ethnic groups were more common.

The significance of Bawku in Mamprusi governance remained intact even through the colonial period, when external interventions began reshaping traditional political structures. However, its foundational identity as a Mamprusi town, both in historical and demographic terms, remains a well-documented fact. The assertion by Hilton thus serves as further evidence that Bawku’s origins and governance were inseparable from the Mamprusi ruling establishment long before colonial authorities imposed administrative changes.

Bawku, meaning “hole” or “depression,” derives from the Mampruli word Boku, as noted by Syme in The Kusasis – A Short History (1932). The town's strategic location made it an important economic hub, thriving under the governance of successive Mamprusi chiefs enskinned by the Nayiri.

Chieftaincy in Bawku: A Mamprusi Tradition

The Mamprusi established the chieftaincy in Bawku, with the first Bawkunaba, Ali, being the son of Na Atabia, Nayiri (Syme, 1932, p. 53). Before British colonization in 1907, Bawku had already witnessed eight Mamprusi chiefs, all enskinned by the Nayiri. The current Bawkunaba, Naa Seidu Abagre Sheriga, is the 15th chief, continuing a centuries-old tradition where Bawku’s chieftaincy remains under the Nayiri’s authority.

Additionally, the oldest suburb in Bawku, Natinga, meaning “Chief’s or Royal Suburb,” was settled by the Mamprusi, further proving their foundational role in the town’s history. The economic growth of Bawku was also driven by the Mamprusi, with the Bawku central market established by Naa Mamboda Mahama, the 7th Bawkunaba (1844–1895). Credit to Voice of Mamprugu.

On the other hand, the Kusasi’s claim to the Bawku chieftaincy is largely a product of colonial interventions and post-independence political manipulations. Under British colonial rule, the Kusasis were placed under the authority of the Mamprusi chiefs in Bawku, acknowledging the Nayiri’s historical rule over the area. However, after independence, political decisions altered the traditional governance system, leading to contestations. Despite these changes, historical records are clear: Bawku is a Mamprusi town, with its chieftaincy rooted in Mamprusi traditions. Any resolution to the dispute must be grounded in these historical realities, not political or colonial distortions.

A Call for Historical Justice in the Bawku Chieftaincy Dispute

As efforts continue to resolve the Bawku chieftaincy dispute, it is imperative that all stakeholders—including the President of Ghana, the National House of Chiefs, and the Otumfuo-led mediation committee—base their deliberations on historical facts. The Mamprusi have governed Bawku for over 300 years, and their claim to the chieftaincy is backed by documented history. Any decision that ignores these facts risks deepening tensions and undermining traditional authority.

Chieftaincy in Ghana is rooted in history, culture, and established traditions. The Bawku chieftaincy, in particular, has been an integral part of the Mamprugu Kingdom, with its enskinment processes firmly under the authority of the Nayiri, the Overlord of Mamprugu. This arrangement has historical precedence dating back to the 18th century when the Nayiri first appointed a Mamprusi chief to govern Bawku. Over the centuries, this system has remained consistent, with the Nayiri enskinning successive chiefs of Bawku, reaffirming Mamprusi authority in the area.

Any attempt to alter this historical arrangement without regard for documented history could set a dangerous precedent for traditional leadership in Ghana. It risks delegitimizing the role of traditional rulers and could lead to further conflicts in other areas with similar disputes.

The media plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse on the Bawku conflict. As the "fourth estate of the realm," the media has a duty to report accurately, educate the public, and hold decision-makers accountable. Unfortunately, media narratives on the Bawku chieftaincy dispute have often been influenced by political biases, misinformation, or a lack of historical context.

To ensure justice in Bawku, the media must:

1. Report objectively based on historical facts, legal documents, and authoritative sources rather than political rhetoric or sensationalism. The history of Bawku’s chieftaincy should be thoroughly researched and accurately presented to the public.

2. Provide platforms for historical experts; such as traditional historians, researchers, and legal experts should be given space to educate the public on the origins of the Bawku chieftaincy and the rightful enskinment process.

3. Expose misinformation by ensuring that some reports that distort the history of Bawku’s chieftaincy by portraying it as a new or contestable arrangement rather than one with deep historical roots are corrected. Media outlets must actively fact-check claims and ensure that inaccurate narratives do not dominate public discussions.

4. Advocate for peace based on justice. True peace in Bawku cannot be achieved without justice. The media should advocate for a resolution that respects historical legitimacy and ensures that traditional authority is not undermined.

Recommendations
The government, the National House of Chiefs, and the Otumfuo-led mediation committee must recognize that justice in Bawku cannot be achieved by disregarding history. Decisions based on political expediency rather than historical truth will not resolve the conflict but rather deepen divisions. To ensure justice and peaceful resolution, the following suggestions come handy:

1. Uphold the authority of the Nayiri as the legitimate enskinning authority of the Bawku skins. This historical role and traditional right must be respected to maintain the legitimacy of traditional leadership in the region.

2. Government must assume and maintain a neutral position and not be swayed by political considerations in resolving the dispute.

3. Promote education on chieftaincy laws, through public engagements. National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) and media outlets must educate the citizens on Ghana’s chieftaincy laws, and how they apply to Bawku to reduce misinformation and political manipulation.

Conclusion
Bawku has long been a symbol of Mamprusi governance and heritage. Any resolution that disregards history will not bring lasting peace. Justice demands that historical facts guide decision-making, ensuring that traditional institutions retain their legitimacy. The media, as a powerful force in shaping narratives, must rise to the occasion and play its role in ensuring that justice prevails.

Bawku’s history is inseparable from the Mamprusi heritage. As evidenced by colonial documents and scholarly accounts, Bawku was founded by the Mamprusi, and its chieftaincy has always been under the authority of the Nayiri. The ongoing dispute must be addressed with these historical facts in mind to ensure justice and lasting peace. Any resolution must respect the time-tested Mamprusi leadership in Bawku, as history unequivocally affirms their legitimate claim.

References
Hilton, T. E. (1962). Ghana Population Atlas.

Rattray, R. S. (1932). Tribes of the Ashanti Hinterland.

Syme, J. H. (1932). The Kusasis – A Short History.

Koara, E. P. (2023). Interview on Mamprusi-Yanga lineage in Sangha.

Voice of Mamprugu Facebook page
By: Hamza I. Salifu