What a Chief
on Anthony Lovat in Bolgatanga (Ghana), 28/Jan/2011 07:49, 34 days ago
One of the highlights for many people coming from Britain to Africa in general and Ghana in particular is visiting a real live chief. Most of the villages around Bolga have a chief, most of whom are subordinate to a‘paramount chief’. Bolga chief, for example, is the paramount chief over several dozen local chiefs. Paramount chiefs are usually very well educated and rich. Many send their children to Europe or America for their schooling. Many do not spend much time in their traditional areas but will stay in Accra or Kumasi, only returning to carry out chiefly duties. Many will be working in politics, NGOs, government and business. Whereas the government is ultimately responsible for such things as health and education, local chiefs are left to preside over many local matters of justice. A chief may decide who has the right to farm a piece of land, who is to inherit a dead man’s livestock and what is to be done with a petty thief. Chiefs can, therefore, be enormously powerful, especially over their uneducated subjects. Many village chiefs such as the ones at Sirigu, Tengzug and Paga have madeit into guide books. For a fee, you can enter the ‘palace’, greet the chief and listen to his words of wisdom and welcome. The African chief is firmly planted in our imagination.There are, however, many questions over the role of a chief in modern Ghana. These date back to colonial times. Herbert Ussher was lieutenant governor of the Gold Coast colony in 1879 when he noted that chiefs were“useless, tyrannical and not to be trusted to administer justice.” His successor held the opposite view, feeling that “the proper way to administer the Gold Coast is by acting through the chiefs.” Pragmatically, the British had little choice but to introduce the system that had worked throughout the empire – indirect rule. This involved using chiefs as administrators under the ultimate control of the British governor. Governor Rodger in 1910 granted himself and any future governor the power to “suspend for a stated time, or [to] depose any chief, who shall appear to him to have abused his power, or be unworthy, or incapable of exercising the same justly.” Ruling through a hereditary elite fitted ideologically into the British thinking that there was a natural order of things. It was a philosophy that respected the hierarchy of blood. Indian crown princes, African chiefs andEuropean royals were born to rule. This indirect rule system was already well developed in the centralised Akan states of the south when, in the 1920s, the colonial Anthropological Department under Captain R.S. Rattray turned its attention to the north of Ghana. They reported that there were significant cultural differences between the north and the south. A dual system of governance was in place – religious priest-kings alongside secular warrior rulers. Many northern people did not even have chiefs but had a system of governance made up of rural homesteads and loose clan affiliations. Eventhose areas with recognisable chiefs were not as highly centralised and hierarchical as the Akan states of the south - rather a council of elders than a feudal monarchy. Not fitting with the system of indirect rule, the British administration quickly appointed (or ‘enskinned’ as it is known inthe north) dominant chiefs and paramount chiefs, their power backed up by money and, ultimately, British military protection. The ruling class was established, a legacy that continues today.At a large social function, such as Laura’s veterinary college’s 50th anniversary some months ago, it is considered very bad form not to invite local chiefs. As we were sat next to them under a canopy during the lengthy speeches, it gave an opportunity to watch this breed of local northern monarchs more closely. There were about a dozen middle aged men dressed in smocks. All of them were chewing kola nuts, a mild intoxicant that tastes disgustingly bitter. It gave an absent minded and simple look to their eyes. Not one focussed on the speeches for a moment. Several wore brightly coloured towels wrapped around their heads. Severalwore thick-rimmed glasses held together by selotape. One was being fanned by two of his young wives. Occasionally one would lean across and exchange a few words with another one. They were fed rice and meat. They were given travel money for attending. They contributed nothing.We walked up a hill near Tongo last weekend to look at the view. As we ate our sandwiches at the summit, looking out at the world underneath, two men ran up the hill in wellington boots. They were from the chief, they told us. The chief welcomes us, they told us. The chief expects some kola (money), they told us.Frustrated with the ineffectiveness of local government officials, many NGOs are now appealing to chiefs to help with their work. This empowerment of the chiefs reflects the early twentieth century colonial strengthening of the chieftaincy as a pragmatic method of control.Visiting the Gambaga chief last week, we were warned to bring‘kola’ by two of his court. They led us into a massive compound house with room for all of his eight or so wives followed by the dingy throne room. The old man was sat on a plastic mat. He didn’t allow us to talk to him directly, only through an interpreter. He didn’t allow us to look at himdirectly. He didn’t smile. He didn’t shake hands. He listened to our introduction before demanding his kola. We gave him 15GHc (£7) and were promptly dismissed.A visit to Sirigu village some months ago meant that, as part of the village tour organised for tourists, we had to go to the chief and give him kola. A couple of his many adult children were hanging around the outside the‘palace’ drinking cheap home-made spirits. In very bad English, they introduced themselves as princes. The chief, we were told, was in his palace but was ‘too busy’ to actually see us. The children were nonetheless willing to collect the kola on the chief’s behalf.Laura treated the Bolga chief’s dogs several months ago, operating on a tumour. Following the treatment, the veterinary officers all paid a visit to the chief’s palace. Josephine kneeled, bowed and begged permission to speak. Despite the chief being relatively friendly and, of course, interested in the dog treatment, the deference shown to this man was absolute. Despite this show of respect, the chief is not the most powerful man in Bolga. There are relatively rich, powerful and educated people living in the town of Bolga who are aware of their rights. If the chief started acting improperly, it would not be tolerated.In contrast to the uneducated and illiterate subjects that many of the northern village chiefs preside over, the Asantehene, the chief of the Ashanti people and supposedly the second most powerful man in Ghana, must represent richer, more numerous, powerful and educated subjects who are fully aware of their rights. In contrast to the arrogant and proud local chiefs that I have come across in the north, the Asantehene is reported to be modest, generous and well aware of his privilege. A VSO volunteer saw him on New Year’s Eve outside a church in Kumasi chatting and mingling with the locals. She wouldn’t have known it was him unless he was pointed out to her.Britain was a feudal system many years ago with local lords and earls exercising enormous power over their subjects. Some, undoubtedly, tried to do the right thing. Some, such as Robin Hood’s Sheriff of Nottingham, have entered history as greedy and arrogant despots. In Ghana, such characters still exist. Your NGO money may be channelled through one and, if you come to Ghana as a tourist, you may even visit one as part of your fun itinerary.