The Local Government Ministry has been used by central government to ensure revenue mobilisation through collection of property rate, ground rent which disbursement among the Assemblies, Stools and Traditional Councils has not been equitable.
There is the need to review the current revenue distribution formular of 55% to the Assembly, 25% to the Stool and 20% to the Traditional Council after 10% has been retained by government through the Administrator of Stool Lands.
Government’s involvement of Chiefs through indirect rule and afford a functional role to Chiefs or Traditional Authority not necessarily Traditional Councils which are the creation of central government.
The distinction between the Stool which is limited to the Royal ruling class and the Traditional Council which is the advisors of the Chief is instructive.
The government retention of the bulk of the revenue through the combined effect of the allocation to the Administrator of Stool Lands and subsequently 55% of the remaining 90% to the Assembly must be reviewed to cater for the fiscal needs of the Traditional Authority particularly the Royal Houses [Stool] and the Traditional Councils respectively.
Incapacitating the Chieftaincy institution makes them a weak partner in the indirect rule policy facilitated by Local Government through its Registrars interfacing the Chiefs through the statutory body called the Traditional Council in localities headed by the Traditional Authority of the various Traditional Areas.
Reference to the Constitution of Ghana and relevant laws; the dichotomy between the Stool and Traditional Councils is clear vis a vis the Chief and who qualifies to sit on a Stool or Skin.
By Prince-Derek Adjei