View PDF Version - RePub

MFANTSE POLITICAL ORGANIZATION
From an analytical viewpoint the political organization of the Mfantse
states is seen to consist of two components: a Stoolholding component
coming from below and dealing with the distribution of authority; and an
Officeholding component coming from above and modelled on the
military command structure.
Stoolholding
Because inherently authority arises from control over land, positions of
authority are territorially based, commonly occurring at three levels, to wit:
1. the position of the Odikro at the village level; 2. the position ofthe Ohene
at the level of a group of villages or of a more important centre; 3. the
position of the Omanhene, the Paramount Chief, at the level of the state
( = Oman). At times there may be a fourth level of authority in between that
of the Omanhene and the Ohene. In such a case the state is divided into a
number of sub-divisions each headed by a sub-chief having his own court
and his own Council of Elders.
Becoming a Chief is to become enstooled, i.e. to be given custody
over the Stool as an ancestral shrine by 'being put upon it'. This emphasizes
the fact that the author~ty of a Chief is inferred authority which, because
it is authority over land, goes back to the members and elders of the
landowning families. This is very clear in the case of the Odikro who is
selected by the leading Ebusua Mpanyinfo or lineage heads. It is true that
the selection is often, but not always, limited to certain members of one
particular family, but it nevertheless makes the Odikro much more aprimus
inter pares who represents the landed interests of a community than a ruler.
For any Chief, the incumbency of a Stool holds that he derives his authority
from the common people and from the Elders who represent them. Chiefs
at all levels, also therefore at the State level, are responsible to the common
people who have the final word in their election and who have also the right
ultimately to destool them. That this is a real and not an illusory force can
be seen from the fact that when by the Native Jurisdiction Ordinance of
1883 the Chiefs and their Councils were given the competence to make Bye­
Laws, this was putto very little use because the enactment of any unpopular
Bye-Laws might, and in some cases did, result in their destoolment. This
was not significantly changed until the Native Authority Ordinance of
llO