Asantehene Warns Lawyers Over KNUST Land Disputes: Key Insights from Otumfuo Osei Tutu II

Introduction

In a powerful address at the 59th Congregation of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), Asantehene Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, the university’s Chancellor, issued a stern warning to lawyers facilitating illegal claims on KNUST lands. This development highlights ongoing KNUST land disputes and land encroachment challenges facing public universities in Ghana. Otumfuo Osei Tutu II expressed deep frustration with private legal practitioners who represent individuals falsely claiming ownership as family heads or Abusuapanin, despite clear evidence that these properties belong to the institution.

The Asantehene’s remarks underscore the critical need to protect university lands in Ghana for academic expansion and innovation. Five years prior, he had issued a similar caution in the same venue, yet reports indicate persistent defiance. This article explores the Asantehene KNUST land warning, its context, and broader implications for land tenure, legal ethics, and institutional growth. By understanding these KNUST property disputes, stakeholders can better safeguard educational assets amid rising urbanization pressures.

Background on Asantehene’s Role at KNUST

As Chancellor since 2001, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II holds traditional custodianship over KNUST lands, granted by the Asanteman Council. This position empowers him to mediate and defend institutional properties against personal encroachments, blending customary and statutory authority.

Analysis

The Asantehene’s speech at the KNUST 59th Congregation dissected the mechanics of KNUST land encroachment. He noted that unscrupulous individuals, posing as legitimate family representatives, engage lawyers to file court cases challenging the university’s possession. “Some legal professionals proceed to record circumstances on behalf of people falsely claiming to be Abusuapanin or family heads with legit rights to KNUST assets,” he stated, labeling this as unethical.

Despite his 2019 warning—delivered “in this very room”—recent reports reveal continued attempts. Otumfuo emphasized, “I have received reports indicating that some recalcitrant people continue to test our resolve.” He criticized lawyers for lending credibility to baseless claims: “Unfortunately, they get some lawyers to take these matters to court when they know that it shouldn’t be so… And yet lawyers, by their profession, take it to court to defend this, which is wrong.”

This analysis reveals deeper issues in Ghana’s land administration. KNUST lands, allocated for educational purposes under the Universities Act, 2012 (Act 855), are not private family properties but state vesting for public good. Encroachments threaten infrastructure like hostels, labs, and research facilities, vital for accommodating over 25,000 students and supporting Ghana’s STEM innovation.

Ethical Dimensions for Legal Practitioners

The General Legal Council of Ghana mandates lawyers to uphold integrity under Rule 1 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (LI 613). Representing known frivolous claims erodes public trust and contravenes these standards.

Institutional Impact of Land Disputes

Land scarcity hampers KNUST’s master plan for expansion, including new faculties and green spaces. Similar pressures affect peer institutions, amplifying the urgency of the Asantehene’s intervention.

Summary

Otumfuo Osei Tutu II reiterated his commitment to defending KNUST against land grabbers at the university’s 59th Congregation. He condemned lawyers aiding false claims by self-proclaimed family heads, vowed decisive action against future encroachments, and reminded all that these lands serve educational advancement, not private gain. This warning renews pressure on traditional authorities and the university to secure assets amid longstanding Ghana university land issues.

Key Points

Practical Advice

To combat KNUST land disputes and similar threats, universities and stakeholders can adopt proactive strategies rooted in Ghana’s land laws.

For University Administrators

• Conduct regular boundary surveys using the Lands Commission’s registry to document vesting under the State Lands Act, 1962 (Act 125).
• Partner with traditional leaders like the Asantehene for joint patrols and dispute resolution via Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms.
• Secure title documents through the Land Title Registration Law, 1986 (PNDC Law 152), preventing litigation.

For Legal Practitioners

• Verify claims via stool land records before filing; consult the Asantehene’s office for KNUST-specific custodianship.
• Decline cases lacking prima facie evidence to avoid sanctions from the General Legal Council.

For the Public and Communities

• Report suspected encroachments to KNUST security or the Lands Commission hotline.
• Educate on customary land tenure: University allocations supersede private interests when gazetted.

Implementing these steps fosters sustainable land use, supporting Ghana’s education sector growth.

Points of Caution

The Asantehene’s address serves as a red flag for potential encroachers and enablers:

• Resolve Will Be Tested No More: Continued defiance invites “decisive action,” potentially including chieftaincy sanctions or court injunctions.
• Professional Repercussions: Lawyers risk disbarment for unethical conduct under LI 613.
• Economic Losses: Encroachments disrupt university projects, affecting national development goals like the Ghana Beyond Aid agenda.
• Broader Ramifications: Disputes escalate community tensions, diverting resources from education.

Comparison

KNUST land disputes mirror challenges at other Ghanaian public universities, but with unique traditional overlays.

Vs. University of Ghana (Legon)

Legon faces urban sprawl encroachments on its 1,600-acre estate, leading to 2022 Supreme Court victories affirming state vesting. Unlike KNUST’s chieftaincy backing, Legon’s relies more on judicial precedents.

Vs. University of Cape Coast (UCC)

UCC contends with coastal family claims, resolved via Lands Commission demarcations. KNUST’s Asantehene involvement provides stronger customary deterrence.

Vs. University of Education, Winneba (UEW)

UEW’s disputes involved internal land sales scandals, contrasting KNUST’s external family claims. All highlight the need for unified national policy under the Lands Act, 2020 (Act 1036).

Common thread: Rising student numbers (Ghana’s tertiary enrollment up 300% since 2010) demand protected lands for expansion.

Legal Implications

The Asantehene’s warning carries weight under Ghanaian law, applicable to KNUST property disputes.

Land Tenure Framework

Public university lands vest in the President per the Universities Act, 2012 (Act 855), Section 3. Customary grants to institutions, like KNUST’s from Asanteman, are irrevocable for public purposes (Constitution, 1992, Article 257).

Lawyer Ethics and Sanctions

Rule 4 of LI 613 prohibits misleading courts; violations lead to disciplinary hearings. Frivolous suits may attract costs under Court Rules, 1997 (CI 47), Order 19.

Enforcement Mechanisms

Encroachers face trespass charges (Criminal Offences Act, 1960, Act 29, Section 144) or Lands Commission eviction orders. Traditional courts can impose fines, complementing statutory remedies.

These provisions ensure accountability, deterring unethical practices.

Conclusion

Otumfuo Osei Tutu II’s resolute stance reaffirms the sanctity of KNUST lands against encroachment. By calling out complicit lawyers and pledging action, the Asantehene bolsters institutional defenses, paving the way for unhindered academic progress. Stakeholders must heed this call to preserve Ghana’s educational heritage amid land pressures.

FAQ