A press statement issued by the Talensi Traditional Council in damage control after a move by the Paramount Chief of Talensi to invite a High Court judge to his palace resulted in contempt of court has evoked a wave of public backlash.

The statement was issued on Friday, exactly a week after two men sent to Justice Alexander Graham by the paramount chief, Tongraan Nanlebegtang Kugbilsong, were arrested and handcuffed at the High Court 2 in Bolgatanga.

The two men― the Chief of Baare, Naab Nyankora Mantii, and the paramount chief’s secretary, Richard Sunday Yinbil― entered the judge’s chambers on March 10, 2023, and told him the Tongraan had requested to have a private discussion with him at his palace on March 11, 2023. They also informed the judge in advance that the discussion would centre on mining-related cases which had been filed from Talensi and were being handled by the judge.

Justice Graham ordered the arrest of the two men immediately and put them on trial for contempt of court. He offered the men an opportunity to tell the court what they had told him privately inside his chambers. But the men declined to tell the court audience. Then, the judge told the court what they had said. He pointed out that their words amounted to an attempt to entrap him and influence his decisions on the mining-related cases being heard in his court.

The men pleaded guilty and were convicted on their own plea. Subsequently, they were ordered by the court to sign a bond of good behaviour for a period of six months before the Upper East Regional Police Command.

But the Talensi Traditional Council claims in its statement that the Tongraan only sent the two men to the judge to invite him for a discussion about cases filed at the court on land-related disputes in Talensi. It also denies the men were on a mission from the palace to entrap and influence the judge, adding that when they were searched no gadgets were found on them to suggest they were out to entrap the judge.


In reaction to the release, some members of the public, who strongly believe the two men committed a crime of contempt and were duly convicted and sentenced, said the statement only showed that the Tongraan had admitted that he was the originator of the crime.

Another section of the public questioned the accuracy of the claim made by the council that the purpose of inviting the judge to the palace was only related to land litigations being heard at the court. That section said if the invitation was just about land-related litigations, the two men, when they were given the opportunity to tell the court audience what they had told the judge in chambers, would have countered the judge’s earlier assertion that the invitation was about mining-related cases and they would not have pleaded guilty.

Some even said silence would have done a better damage-control exercise if the Talensi Traditional Council had not said anything in public in the wake of the court’s reaction to the contemptuous action originated by the Tongraan.

Your defence weak and hollow― NAPAIC-Ghana slams council As public reactions continued to trail the council’s statement, an anti-corruption group, National Patriots against Injustice and Corruption Ghana (NAPAIC-Ghana), convened a news conference on Friday, March 17, 2023.

The group told newsmen that the invitation from the Tongraan to the judge would have constituted an ex-parte communication― a communication made by an interested person to influence a decision-making official off the record and done in the absence of other parties― if he had honoured the invitation.

“The judge would have been in trouble as it happened to Justice Jacob Boon who had an ex-parte communication with the Shaanxi officials and was caught. Justice Graham’s career and integrity would have been on the line if he had gone to the palace. There are notable miners and prominent individuals in Talensi who have cases before Justice Graham and everybody in Talensi and beyond knows that the Tongraan and those miners and individuals are at loggerheads. The Tongraan hates those miners with passion. Zongdan Boyak Kolog is an example of those miners. Charles Nbanbon is another example. Another example of the people the Tongraan openly hates is the Chief of Namoalug, Nab Kolsong Na-Laam Nyuurib, who is not a miner but has a case against Shaanxi before Justice Graham.

“On the other hand, there are entities and people who are known to be the allies of the Tongraan and they have cases before Justice Graham. Shaanxi, which is now known as Earl International Group, is one of those entities. The Talensi District Chief Executive, Thomas Duanab, is another example. The examples are many. If you have a case before Justice Graham and the Tongraan is against you and you happen to see Justice Graham having an ex-parte meeting with the Tongraan at his palace, how would you feel? So, Justice Graham did well by exposing them and convicting them.

That is what he meant when he said they wanted to entrap and influence his decisions,” said the group’s secretary, Zumah Tii-roug.

The group also rubbished a claim made by the council in its press statement that the Tongraan had only extended the invitation to the judge for settlement of land-related cases in the same way Justice Graham and the presiding judge of the High Court 1 in Bolgatanga, Justice Charles Wilson Adjei, had some time ago referred a land-related case each from their courts to the Tongraan for settlement.

“Yes, it is normal for judges to refer some cases to chiefs, traditional landowners, heads of clans and possibly to an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) panel when they deem it right to do so. But this does not give room for a chief to invite a judge or meet with a judge, where the chief is known or perceived to have an interest, for a private discussion on court cases that are being heard in a court and have not been referred yet by the presiding judge to the chief for settlement.

“That amounts to a serious ex-parte communication. This is a weak and hollow defence. But as Justice Graham made it clear in the open court that day, the two agents from the Tongraan said the purpose for which he was inviting the judge was related to mining cases being heard at the court, not land cases as they now deceitfully want the public to believe in a shameful move to save their own faces,” the group slammed the council.

The group’s statement added: “We see their attempts to defend the actions of the two convicted persons as a dangerous way to do damage control. We end by asking the Ghana Police Service to investigate the attack on the judge and to interrogate the convicted persons and the Tongraan.”

Currently, Justice Graham is not in the region following the violent attack visited on his residence by some unknown persons at night last Wednesday― five days after he convicted the two people sent to him by the Tongraan.