Abdulai Yakubu

The writer has shown that he has a lot of knowledge in most aspects of our culture, customs and most importantly the prevailing quagmire that has engulfed the kingdom for the past years. I am very much encouraged about this, because I have for a long time lost hope that Dagbon could one day have their history documented by one of their own - an intellectual who is a Dagbana. Most Dagbon academics that I have come across exhibited so much crass ignorance about what is Dagbon.

Just imagine a prince of a skin in Dagbon in answer to a question on the membership of chiefs in the Dagbon Traditional Council mention the ridiculous figure of twenty- four (24), and was not even perturbed about it.

Nevertheless, our academics should avoid short- circuiting issues when they advance arguments and should be factual avoid distortions when quoting historical events to buttress a point. If the intention is always for an honest and sincere desire to see peace reign supreme in Dagbon for the present and future generations, then writers of articles would not run the risks of exposure when their masks fall off because they will not be wearing any masks at all.

It is in this vein that I sincerely wish to comment on some references as contained in the feature under reference. Let me once again emphasize that most of your series are brilliant, but the problem has always been when issues on the 'divide' are being discussed. And this is where the mask wearing has to be avoided.

The statement that, the kingdom used to follow a uni-linear system of ascension seems to suggest that the system has changed over time. And to be very candid, this is the bone of contention that has infested Dagbon and reduced it to its present state, i.e. those who are of the opinion that the system should be unitary (Abudu) versus those who say it should move from one house to one house (gates).

Huge populations of the kingdom don't belong to either of these gates. The question then is, how is it that people came to identify with these gates and even peril their lives in the name of a 'gate' to the detriment of the well-being of his family? The answer is that it has been linked to politics and the present creation is more political than traditional. Political leaders in their desire for political power in the 1950s convinced a contending party for his support in return for the 'Nam' should they win. After gaining this power and realizing that they could not keep this promise because, de-skinment as it is, is unknown in Dagbon, the argument of 'gateeism' was imposed through LI 59, and up to date Dagbon has known no peace.

It will need a lot of space to go to the practical details of this topic. However, one can always go to history to verify whether such royal family feuds ever existed in the kingdom's over seven hundred years of existence. Of course the argument of gate system has always come up but been rejected, firstly for its divisiveness and secondly, looking at the structures put in place for our 'Nam', the gate system will compromise the position of players (Elders) in the whole 'Nam' system. Just look at the partisan leanings now being exhibited by the Kuga -Naa always in favour of one gate.

Culture is dynamic and change they say is inevitable and very necessary, but change should be based on sound reason and for the better and not haphazard, emotional nor based on vested interest. Some of us have been asking ourselves, what has been fundamentally wrong with the uni-linear system of inheritance to necessitate switching to gate system? Even though it is stated in the article that other gates tend to close other gates, I can state emphatically that, that has never ever been a fundamental reason for the non selection of an eligible contestant to the 'NAM' of Dagbon, nor has it got any stand nor support in our Dagbon tradition.

To buttress this, one can cite the example where someone led a war on his father (a Yaa- Naa), conquered him kept him in Yendi until he died and then succeeded him. Who would set the pace to alienate his gate by fighting his father or even a kin, if he/she knows that such an action will eventually be playing into the hands of the opposing side? We should not advance arguments that tend to give the wrong impression that this gate system has ever been knowingly allowed to function for sometime or that it was instituted and sanctioned at any time by consensus, of a council of Dagbon elders.

Rather it is the fertile idea of a group of people who for political gains fed this festering idea into the heads of some royals whose interest they pretend to be seeking when it is rather the opposite. As it is, the courts have ruled for it (gate system) as the norm of succession and Dagbon is going to be the worse for it, because anybody who has some ideas about the processes of our Nam will and our body politic should realize that the ruling is yet to cause us grief. However Allah knows best and may he forbid it.

But one thing about the uni-linear system was certain, and that is no matter what one felt about a reigning Naa, he was still recognized as such and woe betides you (even with your colleagues in rebellion) if you dare mention him without his title-'N'dan Yaa-Naa'. This again is a feather in the cap of the uni-linear (non-gate) system. One can therefore deduce that ascension to the throne was purely each and every contesting royal for himself. The Yaa-Naa who sent his predecessor to the then Asantehene in the seventeenth century was paternally a cousin and maternally a direct nephew to the predecessor. I for one therefore, would always stand against any system that will polarise us as a people, be it Abudu or Andani. I stand for uni-linear without any name tag to a contestant. This is accepted by structures set by our not gullible ancestors who knew what unity of purpose meant and that under a non- family supported overload we remain the united descendants of Naa Gbewa. Now it is common for those who don't support a reigning overload to call him by his name or worst still his nickname. This is the benefit we are reaping from this imposed gate system.

Regicides

I do not think it fair to use certain acts as basis to recommend the relocation of the 'Nam' from Yendi. It is always not the people of Yendi who create these problems. Someone not living in Yendi caused the first incident, whilst the people who caused the second, which is the recent one, came from Tamale to attack the opposing side with the intention of finally, putting them under subjugation. This is the fact. Check the places of origin of the dead, and you will realize that out of the purported forty and above only about six of the dead were from Yendi.

You will also agree with me that with the first regicide, because of the non- gate system no so called family member came to make noise (The Yaa Naa should belong to all), but allowed 'Yani Kpamba'(Dagbon Elders) to take charge of affairs. Customary proceedings and transition to the next successor (Naa Yakuba 1) was therefore smooth. In fact burial at Worikpomo was immediate.

Government's Intervention

The writer is again unfair to this government when he labeled it as insensitive. Right from the start of the unfortunate incident government was held responsible, thus compromising any action that the government could have taken. It is only fair that government will not allow itself to act by the dictates of people's emotions. Let us keep in mind that there are two sides to the case. (1) The so-called Abudus claim that, they were threatened over a period of time about an impending mayhem to be visited on them and that it was the so-called Andanis who started the onslaught and even the first deaths were from their (Abudus) side, and that the resultant defence of themselves ended in the demise of N'dan Yaa-Naa.

(2) The so-called Andanis on the other hand claim that it was the Abudus who started an unprovoked attack which culminated in the demise of N'dan Yaa-Naa. As a father I don't think it will be fair for government to acknowledge and act on the evidence of one party against the other. Natural justice will not permit this and a father may suffer the sin of such an omission here on earth and in the hereafter. The Wuaku report was very unambiguous about it being a war and how this war was fought and the events that led to the war itself.

Will all the gates even accept the prosecution of those mentioned in the report? Does it mean that only one side will have their people prosecuted?

Instead, government should be congratulated for keeping its cool in the face of sometimes serious provocations and allowing certain facts to surface through discussions and other sources as we saw during the court prosecution of certain personalities for defamation. People came out voluntarily to confirm reports which were hitherto treated as rumours and which were peddled as evidence at Wuaku Commission. This lent credence to it being a war and even identified personalities who fanned it. The lies told on those eminent Dagbanbas were proven to be false. Yet those who peddled this falsehood are still at it with their distortions and pure lies in their interpretations of our culture.

And why government should be called to act only on the criminal aspects alone beats my mind. As if there is no effect to every cause. Let me assure you that people don't always enjoy brutal ends to incidents. For an effective solution to this debilitating problem please let's be more interested in the causes of these seemingly unending conflicts. It is our elders who say that 'a yi tui n-lu, nyin lihi mi la an- tui sheli ka an lu sheli' i.e. if you trip and fall, check where you tripped not where you fell. This is because if you realise the cause of your fall you will remove the tripping agent to forestall any future accident.

1969 incident

I think it is the mistake of not looking about causes that made the writer to mention about the massacres during the Progress Party regime (?) and this present government to draw certain conclusions. No please! The 1969 incident was during a transitional period with the NLC government very much in control and in fact trying to implement the recommendations of the Mate- Kole Report. This was because it was the NLC that set up the commission.

But you failed to relay to the reading public that those aggrieved by the above report visited a series of unprovoked attacks and killings on their so called opponents culminating in the shooting to death the maternal grandmother of Yaa-Naa Mahamadu Abdulai 1V. The palace shooting happened two days after the killing of the grand old lady and others, when all efforts to talk them out of this lawlessness failed, with lots of houses and property burnt down. There was a lot of insecurity in Yendi. And even events of that day that led to the shooting itself were not altogether unprovoked.

So you see, even though the incident referred to could be seen as very unfortunate it is equally important to narrate the exact situation as prevailed at that time. More so, if those who had used the people to employ unorthodox means to resolve their grievance resulting in unnecessary loss of life in that fray had been identified and stopped from further interference in traditional and customary matters, future occurrence will have been prevented. Our failure to stop these politico- chieftaincy contractors who have everything to gain from this 'divide' emboldened them to continue with their nefarious activities that has borne us no better fruits but disaster upon disaster. You don't sweep the concerns of one party under the carpet when trying to resolve the misunderstanding of two feuding parties.

Attacks

We should also avoid mentioning only attacks that impacted unpleasantly on where our sympathies lie. There were attacks in 1979 when a warrior regent was on his way to salute Naa Mahamadu Abdulai for performing his father's funeral; there were series of attacks against the people of Diare in the 1980s, there were unprovoked attacks; there was arson and killings again after the Supreme Court ruling in 1986/7 when people from the losing side were being forced with beatings and other coercive means to pay homage to chiefs. Whole villages and properties were gutted and adults and children killed for no apparent reason than that they belong to an opposing gate. All these were during the reign of the PNDC/NDC. Anyone can check this from the relevant police sources.

Yendi

The writer suggested relocating our traditional seat from the present location of Yendi to Tamale. I beg most honourably to differ. If Yendi is tainted with blood then Tamale is worse. Tamale has never ever been of any serious consequence in the annals of Dagbon history and customarily it plays its function through its overseer - the Gulkpe-Naa, who also is responsible for other very minor skins like Kanvile, Choggo, Vittin, etc.

However just look at what is happening there now as compared to any other place in Dagbon. So can you imagine what will happen if the seat is transferred there and one day an upheaval occurs as it always happens during and after the death of every Yaa-Naa. Our forebears knew why they chose Yendi after all considerations and deliberations and if one analyses carefully one will conclude that it was divine wisdom that informed the decision In any case, where has all the violence been engineered, designed, fabricated and exported from? Is it not from Tamale? To implement your suggestion will be as our elders say 'bihim kpai nin nag'bil nol'ni' (milk pouring into the mouth of a calf).

Now look at the chiefs council of elders and the areas they supervise; Zohe, Kum, Balogu, Gagbini, Bung. Then his warriors Kanbong-Na kpema etc and a whole lot of other issues you did not consider in your article. Now Yendi is even calmer than Tamale simply because they understand tradition and if only the Tamale politico-chieftaincy contractors will allow them, issues will have been resolved long ago to the satisfaction of all.

Yendi and Development

Yendi is not an abandoned town as concluded. Migration, which is universal, is also a northern problem that has been acknowledged by all governments and even outside consultants. However, I am yet to meet the 'stranger' who after having contacts with both Yendi and Tamale does not rate the former higher than the latter.

On developments, it is not true that all governments were unconcerned. Let me mention some projects by the Progress Party Government within its less than two years in power; Started tarring the Tamale to Yendi.

Started the electrification project (it was only inaugurated by Acheampong gov't). The NDC only changed it from fossil fuel operated to the national grid (hydro) Gave Yendi its first Secondary School.

Started building an ultra modern telephone facility. Tarred the whole town roads. On agriculture it built the Malzeri Dam for irrigation purposes; It provided a network of rural roads linking communities to farms.

*To enhance private sector participation, tractors were sold to farmers irrespective of party affiliation, etc.

All this were left to waste by succeeding governments including the longest reigning (PNDC/NDC). Even though the NDC started some work on the road again as you mentioned, the implementation was nothing to write home about. Compare that with the pace of this government; it has already tarred the whole town roads with appropriate bridges and all that, and finished the whole road from Yendi to Tamale.

It is presently on the Yendi -Bimbilla, Gusheigu and other roads. Yendi is no more a dusty township. Again with the advent of this government, the numbers of streetlights have dramatically increased and are adorned with state of the art bulbs.

On the agricultural front, the town and its environs are awash with tractors and other agricultural machinery brought in by government's life saving HIPC funds. There is talk about the Malzeri Dam being brought to life after being left to rot by previous governments. One can see that most developments that are enjoyed by Yendi are during the UP governments, even in the face of addressing security concerns. The impact of government's efforts is still too early to be felt but trust the people, with prayers and calmness of purpose, everything will work out perfect to economically change their lives for the best.

Most of the writer's suggestions so far are genuine even though others are too ambitious. However I will still appeal to him to research a lot into the history of our customs and traditions especially, chieftaincy and he will realize that much as we can genuinely improve upon the status quo as it existed before, traditional and customary practices that are alien to our systems will definitely not fit, and those who are even advocating it can also not work with it.

The fervent prayer of all well meaning Dagbanbas and for that matter Ghanaians is that exporters of violence should allow peace to prevail and this can be achieved only if the rabble- rousers would leave everything that borders on chieftaincy and for that matter customs and traditions to the appropriate elders without interference. Above all patience and pride in putting Dagbon first before 'family' considerations should reign supreme in all our hearts.

Long live Dagbon; Long live Ghana; Allah Bless the government.