The Case of Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana (1912–1943)

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332742747 The Politics of Property Rights: The Case of Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana (1912–1943) Article · April 2019 DOI: 10.14321/jwestafrihist.5.1.0083 CITATIONS READS 0 77 1 author: Emmanuel Ofosu-Mensah Ababio University of Ghana 31 PUBLICATIONS 190 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Mining in Ghana and its connection with mining in Brazil View project migration in west africa in the 21st century View project All content following this page was uploaded by Emmanuel Ofosu-Mensah Ababio on 22 May 2019. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. The Politics of Property Rights: The Case of Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana (1912–1943) Emmanuel Ababio Ofosu-Mensah Journal of West African History, Volume 5, Number 1, Spring 2019, pp. 83-113 (Article) Published by Michigan State University Press For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/723788 Access provided at 22 May 2019 10:56 GMT from University of Cape Coast article VVVV The Politics of Property Rights: The Case of Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana (1912– 1943) emmanuel ababio ofosu- mensah University of Ghana abstract Some political historians, such as Rathbone and Firmin- Sellers, have argued that some traditional rulers under colonial rule introduced new property rights by reinventing tradition and enforcing them within their traditional states to satisfy their own parochial interest. This article employs archival, secondary, and oral sources to critically clarify the exceptional case of Nana Ofori Atta I’s to put forward a contrary view. It argues that Nana Ofori Atta I, with great political will where his predecessors failed, came up with some pragmatic, practical, and problem- solving measures in order to make the indigenous concept of land ownership beneficial for the larger community. résumé Des historiens politiques, tels que Rathbone et Firmin-Sellers, ont sou- tenu que certains dirigeants traditionnels sous domination coloniale ont instauré de nouveaux droits de propriété en réinventant la tradition et les ont imposés au sein de leurs États traditionnels pour satisfaire leur propre intérêt local. Cet article emploie des sources archivistiques, secondaires et orales pour clarifier de manière critique le cas exceptionnel de Nana Ofori Atta I afin de faire valoir un point de vue opposé. Il affirme que Nana Ofori Atta I, grâce à une forte volonté politique, là où ses prédécesseurs ont échoué, a proposé des mesures de résolution Copyright © 2019 Michigan State University. Emmanuel Ababio Ofosu-Mensah, “The Politics of Property Rights: The Case of Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana (1912–1943),” Journal of West African History, Vol. 5, Iss. 1 (2019): 83–114. ISSN 2327-1868. All rights reserved. 83 84 Emmanuel Ababio Ofosu-Mensah pragmatiques et pratiques dans le but de rendre le concept autochtone de pro- priété foncière avantageux pour la communauté dans son ensemble. Introduction Property rights can be defined as “the power to limit the ability of other persons to enjoy the benefits to be secured from the use and enjoyment of material goods.”1 The enforcement of those rights ensures that the right holders are the sole bene- ficiaries of any given property to the total exclusion of all others in any capacity. According to Gibbs and Bromley, property rights are the “bundle of rights” held by one individual in relation to others.2 Vogelgesang also explained the phe- nomenon as the control over a resource (e.g., land) that must be seen as a web of entitlements between persons, rather than merely the possession of something.3 In economic terms, property rights are a bundle of entitlements defining the owner’s rights, privileges, and limitations concerning the use of a resource. In real terms, they are rights individuals exercise over the goods and services they possess including their labor. Property rights can be vested either in individual, as in market economies, or in the state, as in centrally planned socialist economies. There are also common property rights where individuals have claims on collective goods as members of recognized groups. However, in all cases, property rights are important because their nature determines resource allocation in a world of conflicting user interests. Transformation of Property Rights The transformation of property rights involves a redistribution of both wealth and power. It is, therefore, an inherently conflictual (i.e., adversarial) process. Individuals and groups in society likely will mobilize to articulate a new distri- butional definition of property rights (and so claim a privileged place in society) or argue against a change in the already favorable status quo. These people may lobby state actors directly to capture the state’s coercive power and enforce their preferred system. Or, they may seek to create an alternative source of authority, enforcing property rights privately or at a local level. In either case, the subjects’ actions are a crucial determinant of which system is enforced, and whether that system is secure.4 The state alone does not dictate the outcome. Throughout Ghana, the imposition of colonial rule coincided with a rapid appreciation of land values. Officials of the colonial state announced that they would uphold customary land tenure and delegated enforcement powers to The Politics of Property Rights 85 the chiefs of the colony’s many traditional states. These mandates established the framework within which indigenous actors battled one another to claim that valuable resources by redefining property rights. Yet this situation did not exist everywhere on the Gold Coast. This article shows that Nana Ofori Atta I of the Akyem Abuakwa State redefined its property rights system for the benefit of the entire populace. The Akyem Abuakwa State: Geography, Traditions of Origin and Land Ownership The modern Akyem territory comprises over 3,120 square miles.5 It shares bor- ders with Kwahu to the north and northwest and with Krobo, New Dwaben, and Akwapim to the east and southeast. In the south, Akyem Abuakwa shares a border with Agona and with Akyem Kotoku in the west. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, missionary and official reports described much of Abuakwa land as “uninhabited,” “unpeopled,” or thinly populated and grossly “underutilized.”6 The implication is that by the late nineteenth century Abuakwa land had a very low population density in relation to the size of the kingdom and land available for cultivation. Available land exceeded the needs of the Abuakwa population and was not commercialized.7 Abuakwa land was principally used for the mining of gold and subsistence farming and hunting. The territory came into the possession of the state through force of arms. Origins of Akan Land Tenure System The common mode of land acquisition in Akanland of Ghana in ancient times was by conquest and this process normally took two forms. First, a kinship group would arrive in an area and succeed in expelling the original inhabitants by force and occupy said area. Second, a vast territorial area could be subdued through war and brought under a particular political authority. Both of these methods were employed by the Akan, in general, and by the Akyem Abuakwa, in particular, in their territorial expansion and to a large extent shaped their land tenure system.9 In the seventeenth century, a party of refugees from Adanse led by Ofori Panin settled in the area to the north of the Birem River in what is now Akyem Abuakwa.10 At the time of their arrival, most of what is now Akyem Abuakwa was part of the Akwamu Empire with its capital at Nyanoase. Asamankese was then an important town whose stool was next in position to that of the king of Akwamu.11 86 Emmanuel Ababio Ofosu-Mensah FIGURE. 1 Map of Akyem Abuakwa. Stretching from Gyegyeti and Kankang in the north to Adeiso in the southwest, Akyem Abuakwa spans the Nsawam- Nkawkaw railway with the greater part of the state lying west of it. Akyem consists of three subdivisions: Abuakwa, Kotoku, and Bosome. The largest subdivision, Abuakwa, occupies about two- thirds of Akyem territory and measures approximately 1,870 square miles.8 Kotoku and Bosome share the remaining third to the west. The Politics of Property Rights 87 The Akyem settled on the western border of the Akwamu Empire, and beginning in the mid-seventeenth century, they began to threaten the integrity of the Empire through a series of incursions into its northern districts.12 The Akyem kept up the pressure on the northwestern border till 1730 when, acting in alliance with rebellious subjects of Akwamu, they overran the whole of the western part of the Empire, including the original Akwamu country, which was thus lost forever to the Akwamu stool.13 The conquered lands were subsequently divided between Kotoku and Abuakwa with the biggest portion going to the latter. Within seventy years, some members of the Asona family groups moved from the Banso area onto the evacuated lands and were joined by some immigrants from Adanse. Because of the Okyenhene’s contributions to the war effort, the Ofori Panin (Paramount) Stool claimed ownership of the conquered Akwamu lands, and took “possession of all the Aquamboe Croms,”14 though it was customary to distribute some of the war spoils to the subordinate chiefs as a reward or to immigrants as grants. For example, the leader of the Oyoko clan of Asiakwa, on his arrival from Asante, reported to the Okyenhene at Banso, and after swearing the oath of allegiance to the Ofori stool was granted part of the conquered Akwamu lands for the clan’s relocation.15 The paramountcy could also return granted lands to the stool.

Load more