It is rather unfortunate that the Mr John Akparibo Ndebugri, (PNC-Zebilla), who described himself as official spokesman for the Kusasis, said it appeared armed robbers were taking advantage of the situation in Bawku to harass the people. The kusasis are arm robbers and have planned to destabilize the peace Bawku was going to enjoy after the long ranging conflict. The MP Mahama Ayariga knows well he will not secure the seat to parliament come election 2008,by so doing edges his kusasi unemployed youth to intensify attacks on the mamprusi.
John Akparibo Ndebugri is not a kusasi man, he is lost and confuse about his tribe and the kusasi naba Abugrago in history is not a kusasi decent.
The kusasis are ignorant of the real issues connected to the Bawku affair and deliberately wants to throw dust in the eyes of the concern public.
Firstly, it is complete nonsense to imagine that Mamprusis are in the minority in the Bawku area. Bawku is part of Great Mamprugu Kingdom, and so how can any kusasi person in his/her rightful mind imagine that Mamprusis are in the minority. Even if we take the Bawku area in isolation, Mamprusis are not in the minority. If we really want to go by the majority argument, then Bisas are supposed to rule Bawku and not Kusasis. And so the Kusasis should stop this nonsense about being in the majority. I know for sure that Bawku, Binduri, Kuka Zulli, Worikambo, Gumbo all in the Bawku area are predominantly Mamprusis. And so the kusasis should stop throwing dust to the public that Mamprusis are only in Bawku town. Secondly, Mamprusis NEVER robbed Kusasis of the Bawku skin. How can anyone in their right senses make such a claim? It is the same Kusasis which claim that they (Kusasis) requested the Nayiri to provide them with protection against slave raiders during the slave trade years. According to Kusasis, this was how Mamprusis came to be in Bawku. One unanswered question: How could Kusasis have made such a request if the Bawku area was not part of the Nayiri’s territory? Can any Kusasi site any historical example of one tribe requesting protection from another tribe that did not have jurisdiction over the land on which both tribes lived? If the Kusasis were so weak and did not even have what it took to ward off slave raiders, how could they have been landowners in the first place during those turbulent years or wars and take overs? It seems the Kusasis don’t even know their own history well. A euphoria arising from the little political power they have tasted in recent years. A euphoria defined by an erroneous interpretation of freedom and justice. Mamprusis NEVER robbed Kusasis of the Bawku skin. Before Mamprusis started ruling Bawku around the 17th Century, NO Kusasis had ever ruled Bawku.
In fact, the first ever Kusasi to ‘rule’ Bawku was Abugarago Azoka I he was driven away from Pusiga were he first seek shelter, for the offense of going to bed with his best friends wife,this alone makes you know that the kusasis are not poeple to be trusted.
In what way did Mamprusis rob Kusasis of the Bawku skin? The kusasis base their facts on the 1958 Supreme Court declaration which I think they should go back and access them selves well before coming out clearly. Which people were chiefs before 1958? or did the history of Bawku start in 1958? If any government is at the root of the Bawku problem, it is the Nkrumah's government. It is in the common knowledge what President Nkrumah did to people and tribes that were opposing his regime. Nkrumah started the Bawku conflict by disskinning Mamprusis because they were opposed to him and enskinning Kusasis who voted for him. And this is the genesis of the politicization of the Bawku problem.
Source: A.R.K Bawku
