Response to Legal challenge against election of Pe Detundini Adiali Ayagitam, President-elect of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs

October 14, 2024

Press Release
October 11, 2024

Response to Legal Challenge Against the Election of Pe Detundini Adiali Ayagitam, President-Elect of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs

We, the undersigned elected leaders of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs, wish to address the ongoing legal suit filed by Tongrana Kugbilsong-Nanlebegtang, Paramount Chief of the Talensi Traditional Area, and Nab Azagsuk Azantilow II, Paramount Chief of the Builsa Traditional Council, contesting the election of Pe Detundini Adiali Ayagitam, the Chiana Pio, as President-elect of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs, and other elected positions within the House.

This is the president and vice president elect. Left Pe Detundini Adiaii Ayagitam III and Vice Naaba Anonsona Abisa Anthony Atasige III

We unequivocally reject the claims and legal arguments made by the plaintiffs, as they are both procedurally and substantively flawed. The election of Pe Detundini Adiali Ayagitam and all other elected officials on September 16, 2024, was conducted in full compliance with the Chieftaincy Act and the established rules and regulations of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs. Any attempt to challenge the validity of this election is both unwarranted and baseless.

On the Rotational System

The plaintiffs’ primary contention revolves around an informal rotational agreement that was suggested in 2001 by the Sakoti Naba and has since become irrelevant in the operations of the House. It is important to note that this so-called rotational system is not enshrined in the Chieftaincy Act, nor is it part of the standing orders of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs.

The plaintiffs themselves participated in the election, supported candidates, and congratulated the victors. It is therefore disingenuous for them to now claim the election was improper when they fully engaged in the process without objection.

Fairness of the Election Process

We affirm that the election was conducted transparently, following the procedures mandated by law. All members of the Regional House of Chiefs had the opportunity to contest and vote, and the results reflect the democratic will of the majority. Tongrana and Sandema Nab’s participation, along with their subsequent acknowledgment of the victors, makes their current opposition appear as an afterthought born out of dissatisfaction with the results, not with the process itself.

Legal Basis for the Election

The Chieftaincy Act clearly stipulates the process for electing officers within the House of Chiefs. Nowhere within this legal framework is the informal rotational system recognized as binding. Therefore, the plaintiffs’ reliance on this outdated practice has no legal merit. Elections within the House have always been governed by democratic principles, and the recent call by some members to review the rotational system underscores the growing consensus that it no longer serves the best interests of the House.

Conclusion

We are confident that the court will recognize the legitimacy of the election and the baseless nature of this suit. We will defend the integrity of the electoral process and uphold the rule of law. Our leadership, as elected representatives of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs, remains committed to serving the people of the region in accordance with the laws and traditions of the chieftaincy institution.

We urge the plaintiffs to respect the will of the House and the democratic principles that guided this election. This legal action threatens to undermine the unity and progress of the Upper East Regional House of Chiefs, and we stand ready to meet any legal challenge to defend our mandate.

…Signed:…