The Supreme Court has ordered the Judicial Secretary to forward the docket on the Wassa Fiase Chieftaincy Dispute pending at a Kumasi High Court to the Chief Justice for directives. The order followed a submission by a counsel in the case that the Judge could be bias against his client. The five-member panel of the Supreme Court presided by Justice William Atuguba subsequently directed the Judicial Secretary to forward the docket to the Chief Justice for directives as to whether the case should be transferred to another court or not. Members of the panel were Dr Justice S K Date-Bah, Justice Julius Ansah, Justice R T Aninakwa and Mrs. Justice Sophia Adinyira. The dispute arose when on April 19, 2002, Odeneho Krofa Krukoko II, Paramount Chief of the Wassa Fiase Traditional Area was convicted for contempt by a Sekondi High Court and sentenced to a 14-day term with no option of a fine. Four days later, Osagyefo Kwamena Enimil VI was nominated, enstooled and installed as the new Paramount Chief for the area. On September 25, the same year, Odeneho Krukoko’s name in the National Register of Chiefs was replaced with that of Osagyefo Enimil.Odeneho Krukoko appealed against his conviction and sentence and on July 17, 2003, the Court of Appeal quashed and set aside the High Court’s decision. He then applied to the National House of Chiefs to delete the name of Osagyefo Enimil from the National Register for his name. Odeneho Krukoko alleged that despite repeated demands, the House failed to restore his name into the register. He then filed an application at the High Court for an order of Mandamus, which was challenged by the House with Osagyefo Enamil as an interested party, raising a preliminary objection that since the application affected chieftaincy, the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision on the preliminary objection, the House of Chiefs and Osagyefo Enimil appealed to the Court of Appeal, which overturned the High Court ruling on the grounds that what it embarked on was a cause and matter affecting chieftaincy for which it lacked jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal pointed out that the remedy opened to Odeneho Krukoko was the right of appeal to the Supreme Court. On October 25, 2006, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court presided by Mrs. Justice Georgina Theodora Wood ruled that the decision of the Court of Appeal was not tenable in law. According to the highest court, the Court of Appeal erred by its order for the deletion of the name of Osagyefo Enimil from the National Register of Chiefs for the insertion in its place with that of Odeneho Krukoko would constitute the determination of a chieftaincy cause or matter. The Supreme Court therefore set aside the ruling of the Court of Appeal and affirmed the decision of the lower court and ordered the transfer of the case back to the High Court for the application for leave for Mandanus filed by Krukoko to be determined on its own merits. It was against this ruling by the Supreme Court that Osagyefo Enimil and the National House of Chiefs raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the presiding judge could be bias against them that led to the order to the Judicial Secretary to forward the docket to the Chief Justice for directives.Source: GNA