In Ghana, there is historical and research evidencethat shows that when regions or districts are separated, it usually leads to an improvement in the electoral performance of the party in power that supervised the separation. The third condition that stimulated conflicts is the potential electoral losses and gains the separation could present to political parties. There, the concerns were from some traditional leaders of the Guan people in the Akpafu and Lolobi communities who felt that their addition would re-establish the control that the overlord of the Buem traditional area would have over their communities. In the separation of the Volta region, the concern over the loss of traditional authority was located in the Hohoe Municipality, which was being split into two divided between two regions. At the time, a chief in Brong Ahafo paid allegiance to the traditional leaders in Asante, and his concern was that the separation of some communities to form the new Brong Ahafo region would lead to the loss of that control. Similar concerns were raised by the Asantehene during the separation of the Ashanti region before 1959. The Ya-Na cited historical precedence in the separation of other regions to establish his concern that removing Chereponi would mean losing control over that territory. In the separation of the Northern region, the Ya-Na resisted the separation because a part of Dagbon territory (Chereponi) was being carved out and placed in an area that would be dominated by the Mamprugus (subjects of the Na-Yiri).
It concerned influence over the traditional territories making up these regions.
The second condition that stimulated conflicts was issues based. During the previous separation of the Ashanti region in 1959, this contest was between the overlord of the Techiman traditional area and the Asantehene, the overlord of the Asante traditional area. In the Volta region, these dominant figures were Togbe Afede XIV, the overlord of the Asogli traditional area on one side, and Nana Mpra Besemuna II, the overlord of the Krachi traditional areas. Similar dominant traditional figures were identified in the contentious cases involving the separation of the Volta region and Ashanti region. For instance, in the separation of the Northern Region to form the North East region, the opposing forces were the Ya-Na (overlord of the Dagbon traditional territory) on one side and the Na-Yiri (the overlord of the Mamprugu traditional territory on the other). First, conflicts occurred in the regions with traditional leaders actively supporting or opposing the separation process on either side of the region being separated. Three main conditions helped create conflicts over the separation of regions in Ghana. Yet the conflicts that occurred were so severe that the government had to deploy military forces to prevent clashes in the final stages. Considering these regions had no political autonomy to govern, one would have expected a smooth process without serious contentions. The regional re-organisation led to the separation of four regions to create six new ones. This constitutional process was implemented for the first time between June 2017 and February 2019. Due to Ghana’s initial experiment with federalism after independence, the constitution states that new regional governments should be created by separating existing regions through a referendum. Unlike in other African countries such as Ethiopia and Nigeria, Ghana’s second level of governance is merely administrative, with no political and economic independence. The central government has control over regional political leaders, the economic resources coming from the region, and regional policies. In Ghana, the regional governments have no political autonomy.
0 kommentar(er)
