FUNDED BY:

POLICY BRIEF #1
May 2013
M
Moobbiilliittyy FFoouunnddaattiioonn
POLICY GAPS BETWEEN TRADITIONAL AUTHORITIES
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES AT THE
DISTRICT ASSEMBLE LEVEL
INTRODUCTION
In Ghana, chiefs have been central to Ghanaian society for a long time, even before
independence in 1957. The Ghanaian constitutions provide evidence of this continuing trend.
Article 35 (6d) in the 1992 Constitution states that Make democracy a reality by decentralizing
the administrative and financial machinery of government to the regions and the districts by
affording all possible opportunities to the people to participate in decision making at every level
in national life and in government. The structures and institutions are established by the
decentralization policy framework in Ghana for the involvement of citizens in their governance
at the district assemblies. Therefore the interaction between citizen groups and State actors is a
pre-requisite to demand for better and more responsive services by state institutions.
The participation of traditional authorities (chiefs) could be either direct or through legitimate
intermediate institutions or representatives. I.e. it is a process whereby traditional authorities
influence and share control and responsibility over decisions, plans and resources, which affect
both Social and Political participation. Also their participation in the local governance systems is
a catalyst in our quest to the development of our districts and communities.
The participation of Traditional Authorities (TAs) in the District Medium Team Development
Plans (DMTDP), as well as the implementation and monitoring of the project will add real value
to the process itself and its policy outcomes. Traditional authorities have contacts with the
grassroots and are therefore well positioned to express the views and experiences of people
whose needs the DMTDP aim to address.
On the whole, when knowing the plans at the district- and sub-structure level, the District
Assembly can be held more accountable and responsible for the delivery of goods and services
as well as exposing malpractices and choices which do not benefit the target group. Traditional
authorities are therefore to be involved in the various steps of preparing, implementing, and
monitoring and evaluation of the DMTDP.
The policy brief aims at highlighting this important role and drawing the attention of policy
makers to the need to involve them in the decentralization process.

Policy Brief #1

Page 1

BACKGROUNDS TO POLICY GAP

Policy is a broad concept that embodies
several different dimensions. In a
nutshell, public policy seeks to achieve a
desired goal that is considered to be in
the best interest of all members of
society. Policy development can be seen
as a decision making process that helps address identified goals, problems or concerns. In short,
any given policy represents the end result of a decision as to how best to achieve a specific
objective. For instance clean water, good health, high educational attainment, decent and
affordable housing, minimal levels of poverty, improved literacy and high employment etc.
This understanding brings into sharp focus of 1992 Constitution Chapter 20: Articles 240-250;
Act 35, National Development Planning (system) Act 480 and 479 of 1994 and LI 1967, the local
government (urban, zonal town councils and unit committees). With these provisions
implementation, there is no clear function or roles and responsibility for traditional authorities
in the community level to perform. This policy gap is weakening the decentralization process at
the grassroots level of bottom up approach.
Mobility Foundation embarked on Accountability and Responsiveness through effective
participation of traditional leaders in the Local Governance process with Open Society Initiative
for West Africa (OSIWA). This means that traditional authorities should participate in the local
governance process in terms of designing, planning of policies or plans and development
projects, both at the community, sub-district and districts level as recognized in the 1992
Constitution of Ghana and other developmental framework in Ghana. In addition, it will equip
them with the right knowledge, skills and information to engage in and for active involvement in
making decisions, to improve accountability and delivery of social services at the community
level. The project covered two districts i.e. Nanumba North and South with eight area councils
as project target areas. This project covers a period of two years, which involve capacity
building, sensitization, awareness creation and information sharing, monitoring and evaluation,
citizens engagement with districts officials etc. The following methodologies and approaches
are adopting: Community/town meetings, Durbars and forums, Public budget hearing and
planning, Stakeholder fees fixing forum with re-pays with citizens, District Assembly open days
etc.
Area councils forums, conducted on the participation of traditional authorities in decisionmaking and local governance were explained in relation to 1992 Constitution of Ghana. Also
accountability and responsiveness were explained and should be seen as catalyst in
development of their communities, capacity building conducted for traditional authorities on
policy, formulation, citizens engagement and District Medium Term Development Plan. Also
sensitization was carried out, formation and training of Area Council Traditional Coalition and
Policy Brief #1

Page 2

development of their action plan for citizens government engagement were developed and
distributed. This action plan was done through community forums and public hearings for
residents and other stakeholders to make various contributions to the content of the action
plan.

GAPS IN POLICIES IMPLEMENTATION AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL

Traditional authorities in Ghana are custodians of lands in
our communities and are regarded as the central pillar for
the rallying point of his/her people. They know the needs of
their constituency and should therefore be part in the
initiation of development projects and policy formulation at
the district level to ensure effective participation in the
development project and be willing to contribute and to
monitor the project on behalf of the local government
bodies and also hold official responsibility for the shoddy
work they have done.
Even with the current modern trends of development where the people know that
development is for the central government, people still give great respect to the traditional
leaders and hold them to high esteem. With this, traditional leaders should be seen as partners
in development and not as dictators and mediators who only give commands. Instead local
government officials and other developmental partners do not regard their importance when it
comes to locating developmental projects in their jurisdiction and this has narrow to these
policy issues.

POLICY ISSUES AND GAPS

The key policies that govern the decentralization process in Ghana include the following:
The 1992 Constitution Chapter 20: Articles 240-250; Art 35
The Local Government Act (Act 462) of 1993; establishing the MMDAs and related LI
1589 of 1994 establishing the sub-district structures
The Civil Service Law, PNDCL 327 of 1993
The National Development Planning (system) Act 480 of 1994
The National Development Planning commission Act 1994 Act 479
The District Assemblies Common Fund Act 455 of 1994
The Local Government Service Act 2003, Act 656
LI 1967, the local government (urban, zonal town councils and unit committees)
Decentralization Policy Framework April 2010
Ghana National Decentralization Action Plan April 2010
None of these existing legislations on the decentralization process of Ghana today specify any
automatic inclusion or clear roles of traditional authorities in them. The purpose of this policy
Policy Brief #1

Page 3

brief is to draw the attention of policy makers to spell out a clear developmental role for
traditional authorities in the new decentralization framework.
Moreover, following the implementation of the
project, traditional authorities respondents stated
that they are generally relegated to the background
by the District Assembly (DA) in terms of designing
policy planning and implementation of projects in
the district. District Assembly officials have created
insufficient space for their participation in terms of
policies and programmes formulation and
implementation process at the district and
community level.
Also in terms of existing linkages between state institutions and traditional authorities at various
levels, it was established that although the Ministry of Chieftaincy and Culture, and the
Houses of Chiefs are the official institutions charged with the responsibility of integrating their
policies into overall national policy there are no legal mechanisms for interaction with other
government institutions, except for some token representation on the Council of State, the
Regional Co-coordinating Councils and some state commissions. At the community level, the
unit committees and area councils are the official organs of the decentralized governance
system. Insufficient linkages with the traditional councils and traditional authorities in general;
with cases of conflicting activities between traditional authorities and local government
structures were reported.
The barrier between the traditional and local government structures is mistrust and fear of
conflicting power relations. Nonetheless, it was evident from the implementation of the project
that there is goodwill between the two sides in terms of the willingness to work together. This is
particularly true at the sub-district level.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

1. The policy implication at the grassroots levels: for effective decentralization in Ghana.
Traditional authorities, especially chiefs and queen mothers and their traditional
councils, should be given political space to play active and leading roles at the
community levels in terms of project designing and policy formulation in the current
decentralized system.
Integration of Traditional Authorities at the lower levels:
1. The policy on the establishment of district sub-structures should be reviewed to allow
for the automatic inclusion of traditional authorities in the district sub-structures as well
as in the relevant sub-committees of the district assemblies and the various government
ministries and agencies.
Policy Brief #1

Page 4

Interfacing with Traditional Authorities at the area council levels:

1. TAs and their Traditional Councils should continue to operate as independent
institutions. However, steps should be taken to ensure legislative reforms to clearly
define the role of TAs in the decentralized governance system.
2. The traditional councils should be sufficiently resourced to play specific roles including
resource mobilization, supervision of implementation of government projects and
monitoring and feedback on quality of implementation.
3. The TAs should be further capacitated through education on the DA system as well as
modern accountability and transparency systems so that they will align their
development activities with those of the district assemblies.
The Policy Implication at the central government level:
1. There is the need to create an inter-institutional mechanism that will allow the Ministry
of Chieftaincy and Culture (MCC) to facilitate the effective participation in policy
planning and implementation in relevant institutions such as the Ministry of Agriculture
(MOFA), the Ministry of Local Government and Rural development (MLGRD), the
Ministry of Health (MOH), the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Environment,
Science and Technology (MEST).

Policy Brief #1

Page 5