Parallel Or Dependent? The State, Chieftaincy And Institutions Of Governance In Ghana

Abstract

In recent policy frameworks, traditional authorities have been (re) assigned roles of directly representing civil society and local communities as key actors in development, leading to questions about the relationship between the chieftaincy institution and the state in governance. Using the example of a chieftaincy dispute between the Sokpoe and Tefle, a Tongu-Ewe people of Ghana, at the heart of which are claims to para mount status, this article argues that chieftaincy and the state are not always parallel institutions of governance that derive their legitimacy from different sources. Struggles over chieftaincy hierarchies have become struggles for preferential recognition and access to the state conveyed by membership in the Houses of Chiefs. In effect, the chieftaincy institution may be both parallel to and dependent on the state. The article draws attention to the importance of hierarchy in explaining state-chieftaincy relationships because an understanding of the nuances of legitimacy in chieftaincy will enrich how chiefs are engaged as key actors in development.