Family petitions NDC National Executive Committee, citing Article 276(1) and demanding investigation into Western Regional Chairman’s alleged status as a gazetted chief
The Apinto Royal Family in the Apinto Traditional Area of Wassa Fiase in the Western Region has petitioned the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), challenging the eligibility of the party’s Western Regional Chairman, Nana Kwabena Obo II, to continue holding the position and contest the forthcoming regional executive elections.
The family alleges that Nana Kwabena Obo II, also known in private life as Kojo Achempong, alias Nana Toku, is a duly enstooled and gazetted chief whose active involvement in partisan politics raises questions about compliance with Article 276(1) of the 1992 Constitution.
In a petition dated October 28, 2026, the petitioners called on the NDC’s NEC to investigate his traditional status and determine whether his continued occupation of the regional chairmanship position, as well as his reported intention to seek re-election, is consistent with the constitutional restrictions governing chiefs and active party politics.
They are also seeking his disqualification from the forthcoming regional chairmanship election for as long as he remains a chief and the constitutional prohibition applies.
The petition was jointly submitted by Ebusuapanyin Kweku Oduro, Head of the Apinto Royal Family; Martin Anane; and Regina Adjei, all members of the family.
According to the petition, Nana Kwabena Obo II is the Akyeamehene of the Apinto Traditional Area at Awudua-Apinto in Wassa Fiase.
The petitioners claim he was enstooled on September 28, 2006, succeeding the late Nana Kwasi Akwaw II, and subsequently gazetted as a recognised traditional officeholder.
They further contend that his name and traditional title appear in the National Register of Chiefs maintained by the National House of Chiefs.
The petition identifies his entry under Serial Number 1135, with the title of Akyeamehene of the Apinto Traditional Area.
As supporting evidence, the family says it has attached a certified extract from the register to establish his alleged status as a recognised chief.
The petitioners argue that his traditional position raises a fundamental constitutional question about his participation in active partisan politics, particularly his current leadership role within the NDC and his intention to retain the regional chairmanship.
They are therefore asking the party’s leadership to verify the claims with the appropriate chieftaincy authorities before proceeding with the electoral process.
The petition is principally based on Article 276(1) of the 1992 Constitution, which expressly restricts chiefs from participating in active party politics.
The provision states:
“A chief shall not take part in active party politics; and any chief wishing to do so and seeking election to Parliament shall abdicate his stool or skin.”
The petitioners argue that the constitutional restriction is intended to preserve the neutrality, dignity and impartiality of the chieftaincy institution by preventing traditional authorities from becoming actively involved in partisan political activities.
They maintain that chiefs occupy positions of customary authority that require them to serve their communities without the divisions often associated with competitive party politics.
According to the family, allowing a recognised chief to participate actively in partisan political activities could undermine public confidence in the traditional institution and compromise the perceived neutrality expected of traditional leaders.
The petition also invokes Article 270(1), which guarantees the institution of chieftaincy, and Article 277, which defines who qualifies as a chief under the Constitution.
Article 277 describes a chief as a person who has been validly nominated, elected or selected and enstooled, enskinned or installed as a chief in accordance with the relevant customary law and usage.
The petitioners contend that these constitutional provisions should inform the determination of whether Nana Kwabena Obo II can retain his traditional position while participating actively in the NDC’s political activities.
The family has acknowledged that Article 276(1) specifically addresses the requirement for a chief to abdicate his stool or skin when seeking election to Parliament.
However, the petitioners say they are not asking the NDC to extend that express abdication requirement beyond the circumstances stated in the Constitution.
Rather, their concern is whether a person who continues to occupy a recognised traditional office can simultaneously engage in active partisan politics, particularly by holding a senior executive position within a political party.
They argue that the distinction is important in determining the constitutional implications of Nana Kwabena Obo II’s alleged traditional status and his continued involvement in party politics.
The petition therefore seeks a formal determination of the matter instead of allowing the controversy to remain unresolved until after the regional elections.
Among the principal reliefs being sought from the NDC NEC is a formal investigation into Nana Kwabena Obo II’s traditional status and his participation in active party politics.
The petitioners are also requesting his disqualification from contesting the forthcoming Western Regional Chairmanship Election for as long as he remains a chief and the constitutional restriction applies.
Additionally, they want the NEC to consider his removal from the position of Western Regional Chairman if an investigation establishes that his continued occupation of the office is inconsistent with Article 276(1).
The family is further asking the party to introduce interim measures to prevent the electoral process from being concluded before the question of his eligibility is resolved.
It wants the NEC to verify his traditional status through the appropriate chieftaincy institutions, particularly the authorities responsible for maintaining official records of chiefs.
The petitioners have also requested that the committee communicate its decision in writing, provide reasons for its determination and formally notify the parties concerned.
The petitioners have emphasised the need for an urgent determination, citing the forthcoming regional elections and Nana Kwabena Obo II’s reported intention to seek another term.
They have also called on the NEC to notify the regional chairman of the petition and afford him a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations before any decision is taken.
The family maintains that its action is not intended to undermine the institution of chieftaincy or deny any individual their political rights.
Instead, it says the petition is aimed at promoting constitutional compliance, safeguarding the integrity of the Apinto Stool and protecting the credibility of the NDC’s internal electoral process.
It believes that resolving the eligibility question before the elections would help prevent possible disputes and challenges arising from the eventual outcome of the regional chairmanship contest.
The petition has also been copied to the NDC National Chairman and National General Secretary, drawing the attention of the party’s national leadership to the concerns raised by the Apinto Royal Family.
Other recipients include the Minister responsible for Local Government, Chieftaincy and Religious Affairs, the President of the National House of Chiefs and the President of the Western Regional House of Chiefs.
The family’s decision to involve these institutions underscores its call for the claims surrounding Nana Kwabena Obo II’s traditional status to be verified by the appropriate authorities.
The petition now places before the NDC NEC the question of whether his alleged status as a gazetted chief is compatible with his active participation in partisan politics and his continued occupation of the Western Regional Chairmanship.
By 1960news.com
