We can hold chiefs accountable without insulting the institution

Traditional authority remains one of the oldest and most respected institutions in Ghanaian society.

Long before the establishment of modern systems of governance, chiefs and traditional leaders served as the custodians of culture, the protectors of customs and values, and the symbols of unity and peace within communities.

Even today, despite rapid modernisation and political transformation, the chieftaincy institution continues to play a critical role in local governance, conflict resolution and cultural preservation.

The Daily Graphic, therefore, adds its voice to that of the Paramount Chief of Komenda, Okatakyi Komeh VII, in expressing worry that in recent years digital platforms, particularly social media, have increasingly become avenues for insults, false accusations, ridicule and deliberate attempts to discredit traditional rulers (See page 23 of Wednesday May 13, 2026 issue).

In many traditional societies, the stool or skin does not merely represent an individual occupant. It symbolises the authority, history and identity of an entire people.

For that reason, any act intended to bring the chieftaincy institution into disrepute is often regarded as an affront to the community itself. 

However, while society must defend the dignity of the institution, we think it would be dishonest to pretend that some traditional leaders have not, through their own conduct, contributed to the growing public frustration and criticism.

There have been disturbing cases where chiefs have allegedly engaged in multiple sales of land, unlawful acquisition of property, interference in criminal matters and other practices that have brought hardship upon citizens and tarnished the image of the institution.

Such conduct must not be defended simply because it involves revered figures.

Respect for the institution must go hand in hand with accountability and integrity.

Nonetheless, legitimate grievances against chiefs must be addressed through lawful and respectful means.

Resorting to insults, defamatory publications and the spread of false narratives on social media cannot be justified under the guise of free speech or activism. Criticism can be firm without being abusive. 

The increasing abuse directed at chiefs on digital platforms also raises concerns about the general decline in civility and responsible communication in society.

Social media anonymity has emboldened many people to publish unverified claims and offensive content without considering the consequences on social cohesion and public order. 

To address the problem, a collective effort is required.

Traditional councils and the National House of Chiefs must become more proactive in engaging the public and responding promptly to allegations against chiefs to prevent misinformation from thriving.

Chiefs themselves must also uphold the highest standards of integrity, fairness and transparency in their dealings, particularly on matters relating to land administration.

In addition, the state must ensure that existing laws on defamation, cyber abuse and misinformation are enforced fairly and firmly, while avoiding any attempt to suppress legitimate criticism.

Public education on responsible social media usage must equally be intensified, especially among the youth.

The media also has an important responsibility. While holding traditional leaders accountable where necessary, the media must avoid sensationalism and ensure that issues concerning chieftaincy are handled with professionalism and cultural sensitivity.

Ultimately, the preservation of the chieftaincy institution is in the national interest.

Chiefs must act in ways that inspire confidence and respect, while the public must learn to separate constructive criticism from needless insult and deliberate falsehood.