The chieftaincy dispute at Efutu (Winneba and its environs) in the Central Region has taken a new twist, as the Ebusuapanyin of the Tumpa Anona Royal Family of Winneba, Nana Kofi Eduafo, has hauled the Omanhene of the Traditional Area, Nana Kobina Ghartey, before a court for deceit and fraud.

In the suit filed at a Cape Coast High Court on December 4, this year, the Ebusuapanyin intimated that the information contained in paragraph 7 of the Chieftaincy Declaration Forms (CDF) submitted by Nana Ghartey, was false and deceitful, and as a result criminal.

In his statement of claim, he indicated that in 1993 Nana Ayirebi Acquah IV, the then Omanhene of the Efutu Traditional Area, died and left the seat of the Efutu paramountcy vacant, and Nana Gyankuma V was appointed the acting President of the traditional area.

"That in the course of time, a need arose for the replacement of the deceased Omanhene to be effected, in 1996 the defendant was made Omanhene by the Otuano Kingmakers," he stated.

He argued that by law and customary practice a person elected as Omanhene has to get CDF 18 from the traditional council, fill and submit the form back to the traditional council, for the acting President and the Registrar to sign, and forward the form to the

Central Regional House of Chiefs for verification and onward transmission to the National House of Chiefs, for his name to be entered into the National Register.

It is the case of the Ebusuapanyin that the CDF 18, which the Omanhene submitted to the Central Region House of Chiefs, was procured by fraud, making it a criminal offence.

Giving particulars of the fraud, Nana Eduafo said, "Neither the acting President nor the Registrar of Efutu Traditional Council signed form CDF 18."

He insisted that the person who signed form CDF 18, was not a member of Efutu Traditional Council, and therefore not qualified to sign, adding that the person who signed the form was not a kingmaker, as she styled herself.

He observed that the process of submitting the form by the Efutu Traditional Council to the Central Regional House of Chiefs was not followed, since it was submitted through the backdoor.

He maintained that additional information contained in paragraph 7 on the form was false, making the whole form substantially deceitful, and therefore criminal.

Diverting his attention to the particulars of allegations of deceit, the Ebusuapanyin said Nana Ghartey falsely claimed to possess the stool properties, including the black stool, when he knew he did not.

He pleaded with the court that during the trial of the case, he should be allowed to produce at least the black stool, which has been in the possession of Tumpa Anona Royal Family since 1826, as evidence of non-possession of the stool by the defendant, as he claimed.

Nana Eduafo emphasised that the conduct of Nana Ghartey, in respect to the contents of CDF 18, bordered on fraud and deceit, and was therefore criminal and must be punished.

He again appealed to the court to add any additional punishments, as the circumstances may deem appropriate and just against the Omanhene.