Ahenkanfmonline.com Ahenkan 93,3 FM
Chiefs of the Akyem Kotoku State have described as palpable falsehood the allegations made by Nana Boni Abankro, Chief of Adausena against Oseadeeyo Dr. Frimpong Manso IV, King of Akyem Kotoku State.
Nana Boni Abankro made allegations of misappropriation of funds allocated by Newmont to the Akyem Kotoku State in two separate tranches, $100,000 and GH¢2.4 million by the Akyem Kotoku Overlord in a press conference on Sunday, September 15, 2024.
The funds, according to Nana Boni Abankro, were meant for the reconstruction of the Akyem Kotoku Palace in Oda.
The Adausenahene further hinted that his pressure on the Akyem Kotoku Overlord to explain why the reconstruction of the Oda Palace has not commenced despite the huge sums of money given to him has made him – Nana Boni Abankro- a target for assassination.
Reacting to the allegations in a press conference yesterday at the Akyem Kotoku Palace, Gyasehene of the Akyem Kotoku State, Obrempong Amo Kyeretwie I said, “Our checks show Oseadeeyo has not received any $100,000 from Newmont. He stressed there are four revenue streams; royalties, MOU, NAKDEF and EPA, and Oseadeeyo is entitled to all the streams of revenue that comes from Newmont. So where from these allegations? Oseadeeyo is equally entitled to the revenue as Aduasehene and other chiefs within the Newmont catchment areas are.”
On the issue of thugs hired by Oseadeeyo Dr. Frimpong Manso IV to haunt down Adausenahene, Obrempong Amo Kyeretwie I said, “Kotokuhene is very clean in the affairs of life. He’s not even hurt a fly in his private and public life.”
Again, Adausenahene contests that the lands of Oda and Adausena Hweakwae and Ntronang belong to him.
Gyasehene of Adjenua, Nana Kwame Akomeah, contested the claims of Adausenahene over Adausena lands.
The Adjenua Gyasehene quoted suit no L. 414/72 Nana Kofi Ntiamoah II vrs Nana Kodie Akrasie II and Anor in which the High Court, presided over by Justice G. L Lamptey, ruled in summary that “In respect of the motion of the plaintiff against the co-defendant, I have elsewhere in this ruling given reasons to show that the evidence on record satisfied me that the plaintiff is not, and has never been the absolute owner of the land in dispute.
“Plaintiff is not, therefore, entitled to a declaration of absolute title to the land in dispute in his favour. I find that Plaintiff’s action must fail. In the result I dismiss the action of Plaintiff against the Co-defendant. In view of the conclusions I have reached, I enter judgment for Defendant and Co-defendant respectively against the Plaintiff.
“Again, in the Supreme Court of judicature, in the Supreme Court Accra presided over by Amua Sakyi JSC assisted by Mrs. Bamford-Addo, JSC Hayford-Benjamin, JSC Ampiah JSC and Adjabeng JSC Civil Motions No 48/94, The Republic vrs The Court of Appeal Ex Parte Nana Ntiamoah Bediako IV, pleadings of then Adausenahene Nana Ntiamoah Bediako IV were dismissed,” he added.
Thus, the current Adausenahene, Nana Dr. Boni Abankro’s claim of having authority over part of Kotoku land including Adausena, Ntronang, Hweakwae etc have no grounds.
Obrempong Tabi Anum, Nifahene of Akyem Kotoku State dismissed Aduasenahene’s claim of Oseadeeyo Dr. Frimpong Manso’s involvement in illegal mining (galamsey) activities, stressing it’s rather Oseadeeyo who is vigorously fighting galamsey.
