@moorefobc4y: Try this filter here ☝️🏆 #capcut #capcutpioneer #capcuttool #pioneertemplate #ballondor

LauraWhite
LauraWhite
Open In TikTok:
Region: US
Sunday 25 October 2026 12:22:50 GMT
1187
18
1
2

Music

Download

Comments

jbmoney266
JB :
2026-10-25 16:30:53
0
To see more videos from user @moorefobc4y, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Replying to @king.dave437 There is a persistent misconception that historical imperial authority still dictates the governance of chieftaincy in modern-day Ghana. Many believe that the Asantehene possesses unilateral power to destool paramount chiefs within the Asanteman union. However, Ghana operates as a constitutional democracy, and under the 1992 Constitution and the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759), no single traditional ruler holds the legal mandate to unilaterally remove a paramount chief. ​While Article 270(1) guarantees the institution of chieftaincy along with customary law, Article 26(1) makes cultural practices explicitly subject to the Constitution. The authority to initiate destoolment does not reside in an external sovereign; it belongs fundamentally to the recognized kingmakers of that specific stool, grounded in traditional accountability and due process.   ​Furthermore, the statutory framework governing chieftaincy disputes is unambiguous: 1. ​Exclusive Jurisdiction of Judicial Committees: Under Articles 273 and 274, causes or matters affecting chieftaincy involving a paramount chief fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Regional House of Chiefs (or the National House of Chiefs across regional borders), not an individual monarch.   2. ​Voluntary Customary Arbitration: When matters are brought before the Manhyia Palace or the Asanteman Council under Section 30 of the Chieftaincy Act, they operate as customary arbitration. By definition, customary arbitration requires the mutual consent of all parties; it is not an automatic administrative power.   3. ​Legal Consequences of Unlawful Destoolment: Section 63(f) of the Chieftaincy Act criminalizes attempts to destool a chief outside lawful due process, making such acts punishable by statutory law and voidable before the regular courts of Ghana.   ​Historical reverence must not be confused with legal authority. In today’s Ghana, the rule of law reigns supreme: paramount stools are governed by statute, judicial committees, and their respective kingmakers—not the unilateral will of any individual chief.  #ghanatiktok🇬🇭  #Ghana  #asantehene  ##facts  #lawyer
Replying to @king.dave437 There is a persistent misconception that historical imperial authority still dictates the governance of chieftaincy in modern-day Ghana. Many believe that the Asantehene possesses unilateral power to destool paramount chiefs within the Asanteman union. However, Ghana operates as a constitutional democracy, and under the 1992 Constitution and the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 759), no single traditional ruler holds the legal mandate to unilaterally remove a paramount chief. ​While Article 270(1) guarantees the institution of chieftaincy along with customary law, Article 26(1) makes cultural practices explicitly subject to the Constitution. The authority to initiate destoolment does not reside in an external sovereign; it belongs fundamentally to the recognized kingmakers of that specific stool, grounded in traditional accountability and due process. ​Furthermore, the statutory framework governing chieftaincy disputes is unambiguous: 1. ​Exclusive Jurisdiction of Judicial Committees: Under Articles 273 and 274, causes or matters affecting chieftaincy involving a paramount chief fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Regional House of Chiefs (or the National House of Chiefs across regional borders), not an individual monarch. 2. ​Voluntary Customary Arbitration: When matters are brought before the Manhyia Palace or the Asanteman Council under Section 30 of the Chieftaincy Act, they operate as customary arbitration. By definition, customary arbitration requires the mutual consent of all parties; it is not an automatic administrative power. 3. ​Legal Consequences of Unlawful Destoolment: Section 63(f) of the Chieftaincy Act criminalizes attempts to destool a chief outside lawful due process, making such acts punishable by statutory law and voidable before the regular courts of Ghana. ​Historical reverence must not be confused with legal authority. In today’s Ghana, the rule of law reigns supreme: paramount stools are governed by statute, judicial committees, and their respective kingmakers—not the unilateral will of any individual chief. #ghanatiktok🇬🇭 #Ghana #asantehene ##facts #lawyer

About