An Accra Land Court has set aside an earlier judgment against the Lands Commission concerning the ownership of the Shiashie registered land which is being claimed by the Apantse We family.

The court, presided over by Justice Ernest Obimpe, further set aside a purported registration of parcels of land by the then Land Title Registry, now Registration Division of the Land Commission, which did it in the name of the Apantse We family based on the previous judgment.

According to the court, it was wrong for the High Court to have entered judgment in favour of Apantse We family when it had failed to describe clearly the boundaries of the land in question.

Justice Obimpe’s judgment was in respect of a suit filed by the family for a judicial review against the Land Commission reliefs such as injunction, prohibition, certiorari, and mandamus, among others.

The applicant family had wanted the court to stop the commission from granting portions of the family land to individuals and institutions and to compel the commission to register and process application for the registration of lands granted to people by the family.

However, the court observed that the suit constituted an abuse of the court’s process because the family, led by Nii Tetteh Opremreh, knew that the commission had commenced an action against him to set aside the judgment and yet brought the application for review.

The court also observed that apart from the claim of the plaintiff that the government had allocated parts of the said land to individuals for private use, no further evidence was led on this assertion.

“Which parts of the disputed land were allocated to individuals and organisations as complained of, for what purpose were those lands put to by the said individuals and organisations etc. No such particulars were provided by the plaintiff, and the judgment of April 1999 is also silent on it,” Justice Obimpe noted.

The applicant, in applying for the review, sought damages for the loss of the family and its grantees suffered during an illegal demolition exercise undertaken by the commission.

The court upheld the arguments raised by the Land Commission and concluded that “it was wrong for the trial judge in April 1999 judgment to have applied the provisions of Article 20 of the 1992 Constitution to the matter arising from acquisitions made in 1944”.

Justice Obimpe observed that, at the time of giving the judgment, the trial judge did not know that the village of Shiashie and three other villages were allowed under the authority of government, to continue staying there and, therefore, there was no issue of adverse possession in favour of the applicant.

The Apantse We family’s case was that it was in possession of the land in question when it was compulsorily acquired by the then colonial government in 1944 for the construction of an Airfield for the use of the Air Force of the Allied Forces during the Second World War.

When the war ended in 1945, the colonial government abandoned the project without taking possession of the land at all.

The family, therefore, remained in possession of the land as owners without the consent or the authority of the colonial and post-colonial government till date.

They subsequently went to the court to enforce their right of ownership of the land, and it was granted by the court.

The commission, in opposition to the family’s claim, asked the court to dismiss their application for review because it was based on a flawed judgment.

The commission contended that the land the family was fighting over was acquired by the State in 1944 under the Public Lands Ordinance (CAP134) for the purpose of extending the existing airfield and not for the construction of an airfield for the use of the Allied Forces in the Second World War.

In line with CAP 134 the La Stool headed by Nii Adjei Quano, the Mantse of Labadi, was adjudged the rightful owner as against the competing claims by the Osu Stool and the Ga Stool.

Subsequently compensation was received by La Stool, which was apportioned among the various families under it.

The court then issued a certificate of title registered at the Deeds Registry to the state.

The commission argued that the state, in the 1970s, designated the area south of the Accra-Tema Motorway, which is a part of the land, to be used for commercial purposes such as the development of hotels, offices, shops etc.

The area north of the Accra-Tema Motorway was also designated as a residential area (East Legon).

The erstwhile lands department then made several allocations of the land to individuals and organisations.

According to the Commission, in 1976, Nii Anyetei Kwakranya II the then La Mantse and president of the La Traditional council, submitted a petition to the then Head of State, General I.K. Acheampong, to permit the La villages of Shiashie, Okponglo, Bawaleshie and Abotchiman to remain within the East Legon residential area on humanitarian grounds.

The government, after recommendations of the Alomatu Committee, permitted the said four villages to remain within the East Legon residential area.

Therefore, the purported land under dispute, according to the Commission, is a state property. The plaintiff could, therefore, not raise any right of adverse possession because no such right ever accrued under the circumstance.