The legitimately installed Chief of Omanjor-Dwenewoho in the Ga North Municipality of the Greater Accra Region has issued a strong warning to the leadership of the Ga Traditional Council (GTC), headed by His Royal Majesty King Tackie Teiko Tsuru II, to immediately cease addressing him by a non-preferred name, “Salassie Goka.”
The name “Salassie Goka” is being rejected by Nii Ayitey Tackie as a false, non-preferred name, and threatened legal action against the GTC including the chief Sowutuom, Nii Osabu Akwei and his followers who addressed him by a non-preferred name, “Salassie Goka.”
Nii Ayitey Tackie I stated that it is unfair for the Ga Traditional Council to align with the chiefs and people of Sowutuom in escalating the chieftaincy dispute over traditional authority of the Omanjor-Dwenewoho lands under the Abola Piam Tunma Family.
He clarified that his legal and birth name is Edward Odatei Lamptey.
He warned that the continued use of a non-preferred name by the GTC, in collaboration with what he described as unscrupulous individuals, is unlawful, misleading, and creates confusion within the Ga State.
“Using a preferred name is a matter of respect. However, the continued use of a name that someone has asked not to be called can be seen as disrespectful or even harassing,” the chief cautioned.
The traditional ruler emphasized that it is standard and respectful practice for the leadership of the GTC to use a person’s preferred name in communication, even if a legal name is required for official records.
He stressed that “Edward Odatei Lamptey ” is the name on all his official documents, including his passport, Ghana Card, driver’s license, and MTN Mobile Money records.
Speaking in an interview with journalists, Nii Ayitey Tackie I strongly cautioned against the use of the name “Salassie Goka” in relation to the ongoing leadership dispute involving the GTC.
He denied allegations that he is privately known by that name, describing “Salassie Goka” as a fabricated identity allegedly used by the GTC, including Nii Osabu Akwei and his followers, to delegitimize him.
According to Omanjor-Dwenewoho Mantse, the intent is to falsely portray him as being of Ewe descent in an attempt to disqualify him from occupying the Omanjor stool.
He called for an immediate end to this narrative, reaffirming his legitimacy and questioning the motives of those promoting the name.
Nii Ayitey Tackie I was sharply responding to a letter dated Wednesday April 1, 2026 from GTC singed by His Royal Majesty King Tackie Teiko Tsuru II addressing his name in a letter as Salassie Goka instead of his Stool name, Niii Ayitey Tackie or his birth name, Edward Odartey Lamptey.
Fatal Shooting Incident at Omanjor
Nii Ayitey Tackie I also expressed disappointment in the Ga Traditional Council, particularly under King Tackie Teiko Tsuru II, for what he described as a lack of engagement following a violent incident.
He stated that since the fatal shooting that occurred on Saturday, August 30, 2025, at the Omanjor Chief’s Palace during the Homowo Festival, the GTC has failed to adequately engage or support the people of Omanjor-Dwenewoho who lost their lives or sustained injuries.
He noted that, following the incident, the Paramount Chief of the Ga Traditional Area and President of the GTC, King Tackie Teiko Tsuru II, led a delegation to visit the residence of the Sowutuom Chief, Nii Osabu Akwei Ofoli, to offer condolences on the loss of his son, known as “Governor” or Nii Kwashiebu.
He expressed concern that similar attention was not extended to the people of Omanjor-Dwenewoho who were affected by the tragedy.
Within the context of traditional leadership and succession, he argued that the use of a non-preferred name can create conflict, undermine authority, and cause confusion within the administrative, legal, and social structures of the Traditional Council.
He further stated that such actions could be considered unlawful if they amount to identity misrepresentation, libel, or malicious intent.
While acknowledging that such conduct is generally viewed as improper and unethical, he noted that its legality ultimately depends on whether it violates specific laws governing identity and defamation
