# Whether or not queen mothers should be allowed to be part of the house of chiefs in Ghana
## Introduction
The institution of chieftaincy is a significant part of Ghana’s governance framework, recognised and protected by the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. The Constitution establishes National and Regional Houses of Chiefs to serve as advisory bodies on matters of custom and tradition. However, the composition of these houses has historically been a source of debate, particularly concerning the exclusion of queen mothers. This essay will examine whether queen mothers should be allowed to be part of the Houses of Chiefs in Ghana. It will first outline the current legal position which has traditionally excluded them, before discussing the arguments for their inclusion based on their historical roles, principles of gender equality, and the potential benefits for the chieftaincy institution itself. The essay argues that while legal and traditional barriers exist, the inclusion of queen mothers is a necessary step towards modernising the institution and upholding principles of equality.
## The Legal and Traditional Basis for Exclusion
The primary barrier to the inclusion of queen mothers in the Houses of Chiefs has been the legal definition of a “chief.” Article 277 of the 1992 Constitution defines a chief as a person who, hailing from the appropriate family and lineage, has been validly nominated, elected or selected and enstooled, enskinned or installed as a chief or queen mother in accordance with the relevant customary law and usage. While this definition explicitly mentions queen mothers, the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759) did not initially provide a clear pathway for their automatic inclusion into the Houses of Chiefs, which were composed of paramount chiefs and other designated chiefs.
Historically, the role of a chief as the ultimate head of a traditional area was viewed as a male position, and this perspective influenced the colonial and post-colonial structures of governance, including the composition of the Houses of Chiefs (Ntewusu, 2020). Consequently, although queen mothers held significant power within their communities – often acting as ‘kingmakers’, advisors to the chief, and leaders of women – they were not granted the same formal recognition within the national chieftaincy structures. Their role was seen as complementary but separate, rather than one that warranted a seat in the male-dominated Houses of Chiefs. This interpretation has been the basis for their systemic exclusion from formal decision-making processes at the regional and national levels.
## Arguments for the Inclusion of Queen Mothers
Arguments for admitting queen mothers into the Houses of Chiefs are compelling and rooted in principles of justice, equality, and good governance. The most prominent argument is based on gender equality. The exclusion of queen mothers is seen by many as a form of gender discrimination, which contravenes Article 17 of the 1992 Constitution prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of gender. Given that queen mothers are leaders in their own right, their exclusion from the highest bodies of customary governance is an anomaly in a modern democratic state that officially promotes gender equality (Odotei, 2006).
Furthermore, their inclusion would be a recognition of the significant historical and contemporary roles they play. Queen mothers are custodians of tradition, genealogy, and customary law, particularly concerning women and children. Their presence in the Houses of Chiefs would bring a valuable perspective that is currently absent, enriching deliberations on issues such as inheritance, land rights, and social welfare (Manuh, 2011). Excluding them means that the Houses of Chiefs operate without the formal input of a crucial segment of traditional leadership, potentially weakening the quality and legitimacy of their decisions. In recent years, advocacy from queen mothers themselves and civil society organisations has led to some progress, with some Regional Houses of Chiefs, such as the Asanteman Council, admitting queen mothers. This signals a growing consensus that the status quo is no longer tenable.
## Conclusion
In conclusion, while Ghana’s legal and traditional structures have historically marginalised queen mothers from formal membership in the Houses of Chiefs, the arguments for their inclusion are overwhelming. The exclusion is inconsistent with their significant customary authority and with the constitutional principle of gender equality. Including queen mothers would not only rectify a long-standing injustice but also strengthen the chieftaincy institution by making it more representative and effective in addressing the needs of all community members. The gradual steps taken by some Regional Houses to admit them are positive developments that should be supported by a definitive national legal reform to guarantee a place for queen mothers in both the Regional and National Houses of Chiefs. This reform is essential for the continued relevance and legitimacy of chieftaincy in twenty-first-century Ghana.
## References
- Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992.
- Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759) (Ghana).
- Manuh, T. (2011) ‘The “Traditional” and the “Modern”: The Politics of Women’s Rights Activism in Ghana’. In: Tripp, A. M. (ed.) African Women’s Movements: Changing Political Landscapes. Cambridge University Press, pp. 195-216.
- Ntewusu, S. A. (2020) ‘The Politics of Representation and the Quest for Queen Mothers’ Inclusion in the Houses of Chiefs in Ghana’. Ghana Journal of Development Studies, 17(2), pp. 26-49.
- Odotei, I. K. (2006) ‘Bringing women’s history into the mainstream of Ghanaian history’. In: Odotei, I. and Hagan, G. (eds.) The Historical and Socio-Cultural Context of Queenmothers in Ghana. Institute of African Studies, University of Ghana.
