MIGRANT CHIEFS IN URBAN GHANA: THE CASE OF THE DAGOMBA CHIEFS IN ACCRA

ABSTRACT

Traditional forms of leadership are many and varied. One of the variants is chieftaincy, which is considered the oldest institution of traditional leadership. It has also enjoyed the glory, powers and prestige among many continents around the world including Africa. In Postcolonial African countries such as Ghana, the institution of chieftaincy has continued to be a source of attraction to various individuals and groups. One of such groups is migrant communities. The resurgence and renewal of interest in the chieftaincy institution in Ghana is particularly noticed among migrants in urban areas such as Accra and Kumasi. However, migrant chiefs are referred to in the literature, as headmen or chiefs. They are called chiefs by their tribesmen, and wield some authority (over them). As to whether or not these leaders are chiefs in the sense of indigenous Ghanaian chiefs, are matters of concern to this study. Adopting the qualitative approach and using various research instruments such as interview guide, an audio tape recorder, and, techniques including observation and informal conversation, participants were selected purposively and conveniently for this study. Key informants for the study were Dagomba migrant chiefs, their elders and sub-chiefs in various communities in Accra. Data collected was analysed through the process of framework analysis, based on themes and guided by the theory of social construction of reality espoused by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann (1966). This empirical data was also gathered and analysed in the context of intensive literature reviewed. Some of the key findings in this study are that, the qualification to the selection/nomination for a title, as migrant chief is not based on lineage or a candidate hailing from any appropriate (royal) family. Rather, one‘s wealth and level of education as well as owning a permanent resident in the respective community are among the key criteria for determining who becomes a chief, thus going contrary to the chieftaincy Act 2008, Act 759 of the 1992 iii constitution which states that a chief is ―a person who, hailing from the appropriate family and lineage…‖. Surprisingly, such seemingly contradiction does not prevent Dagomba migrants and the Ghanaian state from recognizing and referring to them as chiefs. Also, the status/position of the Dagomba migrant chiefs in Accra can be described as ―paradoxical‖. Their chieftaincy titles are less-hereditary, their customary foundations are less clear, yet they are recognized as chiefs by their respective subjects in their communities, by the indigenous divisional Ga-chiefs and the state at large, to the extent that the state has provided a bus for the National Council of Zongo Chiefs of which the Dagomba Migrant Chiefs are a part. The mode of installation of Dagomba migrant chiefs also combines elements of both their places of origin (Dagbon) and the indigenous Ga-chieftaincy of the south, whiles they are hierarchically ranked, with a structure of power in this hierarchy. The chiefs however, have a cordial relationship with their neighbours including the Ga-chiefs, other ethnic migrant chiefs, and some state actors including; the police, and the AMA.