Ashanti Royal files petition against prominent lawyer, citing concerns of professional misconduct

A significant development has emerged within Ghana’s legal community. Nana Kwesi Osei Bonsu, a respected principal member of the Huahi Achama Tutuwaa Royal Family of Boadi, has submitted a formal petition to the General Legal Council regarding Mujeeb Rahman Ahmad, Esq., a solicitor from Kumasi’s Moomin & Botta Solicitors. Filed on June 23, 2025, the petition outlines serious concerns of professional misconduct, potential breaches of client confidentiality, alleged conflicts of interest, and a purported abuse of power.

From the United States, where he has been granted humanitarian protection, Nana Kwesi Osei Bonsu is seeking a thorough review of the matter. His petition, lodged under the guidelines of the Legal Profession Act, 1960 (Act 32), and the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (L.I. 613), raises questions about Mr. Ahmad’s adherence to legal ethics. The central concern revolves around the claim that after being privy to confidential information and legal strategies concerning a family land dispute, Mr. Ahmad subsequently acted in a manner that was perceived to be adverse to Nana Osei Bonsu’s interests, by representing an opposing party in the same dispute.

Addressing Concerns: From Engaged Counsel to Alleged Adversary

The petition details a series of events beginning on March 27, 2021, when Nana Osei Bonsu engaged Mr. Ahmad to assist with the execution of a High Court judgment concerning the royal family’s land. During this period, Mr. Ahmad reportedly had access to sensitive information and documents.

However, the petitioner claims that without his knowledge or consent, Mr. Ahmad filed an application in the High Court to substitute Nana Osei Bonsu with an unconnected third party. This action is described in the petition as “procedurally improper” and “factually misleading,” and is presented as an attempt to undermine a standing judgment in Nana Osei Bonsu’s favor.

The situation reportedly intensified on August 30, 2021. Nana Osei Bonsu recounts an encounter in Mr. Ahmad’s chambers, where the solicitor allegedly pressured him to withdraw his opposition to the substitution application. The petition suggests that during this encounter, Mr. Ahmad made statements that Nana Osei Bonsu interpreted as unfortunate.

Additionally, the petition notes the perplexing disappearance of Ms. Rhodaline Amoah Darko, a Lands Commission officer, on that same day. Ms. Darko had previously issued an official report that supported the petitioner’s family’s claim to the disputed land. Her disappearance, which remains unresolved, is highlighted as a point of concern in the petition.

Seeking Resolution: A Royal’s Pursuit of Accountability and Human Rights Affirmation

The petition states that Nana Osei Bonsu’s High Court judgment was subsequently set aside, and he was arrested by the Ghana Police Service, reportedly based on complaints linked to Mr. Ahmad’s associates. He was held for six days and describes experiencing “degrading treatment and psychological intimidation” before being charged with “selling land without title.” While eventually acquitted, he states the experience caused “severe emotional and reputational harm.”

Below is the petition

In response to his arrest and alleged mistreatment, Nana Osei Bonsu filed a human rights suit (HR/0026/2022) against the Ghana Police Service. He states that judgment was entered in his favor by Her Ladyship Barbara Tetteh Charway, confirming the violation of his constitutional rights. However, according to Nana Osei Bonsu, no tangible enforcement or disciplinary measures were taken against the state actors involved, which he attributes to alleged pressure and interference by some powerful people in Kumasi.

Nana Osei Bonsu attributes the ongoing pressure, in part, to Mr. Ahmad’s actions and alleged institutional interference, which he states ultimately compelled him to leave Ghana. He is currently seeking protection under the United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT), expressing fear of persecution. His account underscores the gravity of the allegations and the potential impact of professional actions on individuals.

The legal grounds cited for this disciplinary action include:

 * Conflict of Interest: Alleged violation of Rule 9 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969, for purportedly acting against a former client in the same matter.

 * Breach of Confidentiality: Alleged betrayal of trust under Rule 10, by reportedly using privileged information.

 * Professional Misconduct and Abuse of Process: Actions described as a “perversion of the course of justice” under Section 19 of the Legal Profession Act, 1960, and an abuse of court procedures.

 * Ethical Misconduct: Behavior described as “unbecoming of a barrister,” which could undermine the integrity of the Ghana Bar Association’s Code of Ethics.

 * Dishonourable Conduct: Actions that are alleged to have caused personal harm and brought the legal profession into disrepute.

A Call for Upholding Legal Integrity in Ghana

Nana Kwesi Osei Bonsu, Founder of Land Rights Defenders Inc. in Columbus, Ohio, has formally requested that the General Legal Council in Ghana conduct an immediate and thorough disciplinary inquiry into Mujeeb Rahman Ahmad’s conduct. The petition urges the Council to consider appropriate sanctions, ranging from a public reprimand to disbarment. Additionally, it calls for a referral to the Attorney-General for a criminal investigation into the alleged threats.

This case is presented as a crucial examination of legal ethics in Ghana. It highlights the fundamental importance of attorney-client privilege and the potential for professional misconduct to erode public trust in the justice system. Nana Kwesi Osei Bonsu’s petition underscores the call for accountability within the legal profession, emphasizing that all practitioners should operate within the bounds of the law and ethical guidelines.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.