LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CUSTOMARY LAW – Chieftaincy Title – Applicability of Kojo II v. Bonsie Principle – Not Limited to Land Disputes
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The resolution of conflicting traditional evidence is certainly not limited to the resolution of conflicting claims with regard to ownership or title to land. As has been shown in the instant case, it may occur in claims such as the one in the instant appeal.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"The resolution of conflicting traditional evidence is certainly not limited to the resolution of conflicting claims with regard to ownership or title to land. As has been shown in the instant case, it may occur in claims such as the one in the instant appeal."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The Kojo II v. Bonsie principle for resolving conflicting traditional evidence applies beyond land disputes—including chieftaincy title claims. Where traditional evidence conflicts on succession, customs, or history, the court tests each version against recent established facts to determine which is more probable. The principle is not limited by subject matter. The same methodology applies: examine contemporary evidence, documents, acts, and proven facts. The court does not arbitrarily prefer one tradition. The principle recognises that traditional evidence is used in various contexts. The court’s duty is to determine the most probable traditional history based on objective evidence. The principle promotes rational resolution of traditional evidence conflicts regardless of the nature of the claim.