Funerals in Ghana, festival like no other!
Whenever I have discussions with people of other nations, they just do not understand the Ghanaian fixation with the dead and dead bodies. We commit so much time and resources to burying our dead. I am certain that funerals play a significant role in the Ghanaian economy. The house needs to be renovated, undertakers, the church has to be dealt with, cloth and then, of course, there is several days’ supply of food and drinks for hundreds, if not thousands, of “friends and sympathisers”!
On the 22nd of November, 2023, I had occasion to deliver a very interesting paper to students and Faculty of the Department of Integrated Social Sciences (DISS) (Social Anthropology Unit) of the University Of Media, Arts and Communication (UNIMAC) Institute of Journalism on the topic ASSET ACQUISITION UNDER THE INTESTATE SUCCESSION ACT, 1985 (PNDC 111) AND THE SURVIVAL OF THE TRADITIONAL INHERITANCE SYSTEMS IN GHANA.[1] The paper took a social perspective to assess the Intestate Succession Act, 1985 (PNDC 111) and its effects on traditional inheritance systems in Ghana.
The paper assessed the PNDCL 111 and how it had changed our society, especially for those with matrilineal lineages. For the sake of situating this discussion, certain aspects of that paper will be produced in this article.
“Kutsoati and Morck[2] discuss the matrilineal and patrilineal systems in Ghana thus;
The Akans (Ashanti, Central and Western regions; and the Lobi, Tampolese and Baga (Northern Ghana) all use variants of matrilineal customary law. The Akans, constituting about 48% of Ghana’s population and the largest tribe, are often considered an archetypical matrilineal culture. Under matrilineal tradition, a family’s controlling spirit passes from generation to generation only through female blood lines, from whom Akan children are believed to inherit their “flesh and blood,” i.e., their source of existence (Bleeker (1966). Family ties, traced only through female ancestors, define one’s extended family…..…In a matrilineal tribe, one is thus related by blood to one’s mother, full siblings, and half‐ siblings by a common mother (uterine half siblings), but not to one’s father nor to any half‐siblings by a common father. Thus, children belong to their mother’s lineage, but not the father’s. A traditional Akan male thus feels blood kinship to his mother's brother (wɔfa: pron. wə‐fa), but at most a weak connection to his father's brother. An Akan male does not consider his children to be his blood kin. His closest blood relative in the next generation is his sister’s son, and this maternal nephew (wɔfase: pron. wə‐ fa‐si) is his presumed heir if his brothers predecease him and he dies intestate. Because Akan traditional rules revert a married couple’s acquired property to the decedent’s matrilineal extended family (Awusabo, 1990), a widow and her children can be left destitute by the husband’s death. She must thus look to her brothers for support; and her children must look to their maternal uncles for bequests. The expectation of inheriting a maternal uncle’s wealth is often said to blunt an Akan nephew’s incentives to acquire human capital or seek a job, and is captured neatly in an old Akan adage “wɔfa wɔho nti me nye egyuma” (Lit. “I have a rich uncle; I don’t need a job”)………
The main patrilineal societies in Ghana are the Ga tribe (in the Greater Accra region), the Ewe tribe (in the Volta region), and the Dagomba and Nanumba tribes in the Upper East region. In a patrilineal tribe, a family’s controlling spirit passes from generation to generation only through male blood lines, and these connections define one’s extended family, or patriclan. Under patrilineal custom, one’s extended family thus includes one’s children as well as one’s father, siblings, half siblings by a common father, aunts and uncles, and so on. One’s sisters and halfsisters by a common father are members of one’s lineage; but their children are not. This is because they belong to that sister’s or half‐sister’s husband’s family. Likewise, one’s grandchildren through a son belong to one’s family, but grandchildren though a daughter belongs to their father’s family, and are thus not one’s blood relatives.
It is based on these lineages that customary inheritance is. Thus, before the passage of PNDCL 111, depending on the deceased’s lineage, and the kind of marriage the deceased had contracted, the nuclear family could be seriously disadvantaged after death.
PNDCL 111 changed our society as we knew it. Traditional widowhood (in the context of both male and female spouses) no longer involves being turned out of one’s home and forfeiting assets acquired in the course of marriage, whichever name they would bear.”
The paper concluded with an attempt to answer the question (whether anthropological or legal) on the table, which was whether the survival of the traditional inheritance system in Ghana is in jeopardy, given the current state of the law on asset acquisition and intestate succession.
The short answer is; yes!
The traditional inheritance system has been diluted, especially for matrilineal societies. The nuclear family now rules, at least by the law on intestate succession.
That said, however, there is a lingering problem that needs solving, I think, by legislation.
This problem has to do with the vexed question of funerals and who are, or should be, in charge.
I shall begin with the realities of dealing with the mortal remains of a loved one.
DEALING WITH DEAD BODIES AND FUNERALS-THE PRACTICALITIES
With the passage of PNDCL 111 has developed a certain practical reality over the years. The law did not touch on the custom regarding the mode of dealing with the corpse of a deceased family member. The law is well-settled that under Ghanaian customary law, the corpse or remains of the dead person does not form part of the estate of the deceased; it belongs to the family of the deceased and it is the family which makes decisions regarding the burial and funeral of the deceased.[3]
What constitutes the family of a person is a discourse which never ceases to amaze all other people except Ghanaians. In some cases, such as happens in some Akan communities, the spouse and children are not considered to be part of the family of the deceased. They traditionally had the obligation of providing the shroud, coffin, bath and certain burial items, but not much else, as far as the customary practices and usages were concerned. That said, however, one cannot ignore the fact that with no prospect of taking control of the deceased’s assets, out of which funds could be accessed to make disbursements towards holding the funeral, it may be difficult for the family (in reference to the deceased person’s “extended” family) to take up the responsibility of a “befitting funeral” without resources.
The responsibility of burying the dead has practically shifted to the surviving spouse and children.
There has been instances where the courts have been inundated with writs and applications for injunctions brought up due to the confused state of a family insisting on undertaking the burial and funeral rites as they have the right to do. In such circumstances, the family, after insisting on taking charge and determining how the funeral will be held, when and where would be expecting the spouse and children to make specific contributions outside of the traditionally required shroud, coffin, bath and burial items.
I have seen surviving spouses prevented from attending the funeral with the surviving children of the deceased. I have also been acquainted with the situation of surviving spouse, children and extended family being so unable to co-operate that they have opted to stay away from the burial rites altogether.
Two recent occurrences have plagued my mind enough to write this article. For the sake of not embarrassing anyone, with the focus of attempting to get the law to right societal wrongs and reflect the current realities, I have tweaked the facts a bit.
In the first instance, the father, now deceased, was an Akan, and therefore matrilineal, married to a Ga-Dangbe woman. Ga-Dangbes, for the sake of non-Ghanaians reading this article, are patrilineal. In our customary law, therefore, the children of the marriage are neither Akan nor GaDangbe. They are technically tribeless.
The deceased was ill for several years before he passed on. As has become the reality of modern life, the care was done and paid for, quite happily, by his wife and children. There were a few perfunctory visits by his sole surviving sister, nephews and a few cousins. None of these made any effort (and were not expected to make any by his nuclear family) to foot the many medical bills. The deceased had raised high-achieving sons and daughters who are quite successful. When he died, the spouse and children duly sent his body to a mortuary for preservation and informed “the family”.
The family came to the man’s home and started arrangements for the “one week observance”. It was done well. It was announced that the entire funeral–service and “sitting” would be held in Accra, but the body would be conveyed to his village for interment. After the “one week”, for whatever reason, the deceased’s family had a change of heart and decided to relocate the entire arrangement to the village, insisting that the surviving widow and her children should fall in with this latter-day plan. The widow and her children complained about the cost and difficulty of holding a funeral in a village where they had no home and where services like catering etc. could be procured only at great expense. In all these arrangements, the family was not ready to bear the cost of anything, and were also insisting on the payment of a certain sum of money to the nephew who was the “ayipasohene” (chief mourner) towards the arrangements, including renovating the family house in the village.
The children and spouse did not agree. They were told to stay away from the funeral, and, sadly, they did. The spouse and children, after being duly educated on the law, realised they had no choice. They felt the need to, and paid for the cost of preservation of the body, coffin, etc., and saw their dad off with a memorial, but without a body. The family came for their corpse and then went ahead with a burial without the spouse and children, in a manner that was not at all “befitting” and not reflective of the way the deceased lived his life.
The second instance that has caused this reflection is similar, but not quite as bad. The deceased was Guan and therefore patrilineal. The deceased’s family was duly informed of the death of their brother. They agreed on two dates for the “one week” and “funeral proper” at the very first family meeting. Then came the demands; the children were to pay for their transportation to Accra and back for the both events, their boarding and lodging, laying-in-state, conveying the body to the village for burial, grave preparation, electricity to be consumed once they got to the village, etc. In addition, the widow, children and in-laws were given a list of bath and burial items, all manner of toiletries, towel, sponge …even Sasabonsam, the unmentionable giant, would not need so much soap to bath! The deceased also hailed from an area where the children were to pay an amount of money to be put on top of the coffin, “adakansedo”. This was negotiated and agreed quite admirably. After all this, the deceased’s family informed the widow and children that they would also mount a donation table for the benefit of the family. What the proceeds would be used for or what bill it was to offset is a mystery. At the last minute, due to a slight disagreement, a brother of the deceased obtained a last-minute injunction to stop the long-arranged funeral two days to time, at a period when some people had even arrived from abroad, intending to attend their father and relative’s funeral. These people were not prepared to return without dealing with the funeral as planned. In the end, they had to renegotiate and purchase a new coffin among other things, because one of the family’s complaints was that the imported coffin the deceased’s children had presented was too small and that the body was too constrained- neho kyereno! That was my first experience of a corpse complaining that the accommodation was too tight!
So my question was, and still is, what was the role of the deceased’s family in both cases?
As I have discussed in this paper, the realities of life as we know it has shifted the real responsibility of burials and funerals to the nuclear family. The extended family which has a legal right and obligation has practically little to do at these events, but, they still have the right, by law, to call the shots. The confusion associated with funerals in Ghana has to be settled somehow. In my view, legislation would be the best way of doing so.
I acknowledge with some relief, the Honourable Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkornoo’s Practice Direction for the Determination of Applications for Injunctions to Restrain the Burial of a Deceased Person launched on the 8th of April, 2024. The Direction acknowledges the legal position that the corpse of a deceased person is under the control of the family and further that the family bears the obligation to arrange for a funeral that reflects the deceased’s social standing and the family’s dignity.
The Direction also sets out some guidelines such as;
- Applications should be made promptly with clear evidential support for the injunction,
- That except in extremely compelling circumstances, an application ex parte brought less than fourteen days to the schedules funeral arrangements shall not be entertained, and
- That courts should exercise great caution where applications are brought at the “eleventh hour.”
While acknowledging that these Directions will make a positive impact, I think that they can only be a stop-gap measure. It is time to tackle the underlying problem and re-orient our thinking from the realities of life, of who constitutes a person’s family.
It is time for the law to reflect the changed realities of our society. The days of communal living are fast passing us by. Most of us can, and do, go for days, weeks or sometimes months (in fact years in some cases) in our respective homes without meeting our siblings, aunties, uncles and other extended family members, who in our traditional setting are “family”. Our closest family has by default become our spouses and children. They are the ones who assist us in our day-to-day living. They are also the ones who will also likely benefit from our estates if any.
By legislation, a lot of customary practices are no longer with us. Intestate succession has been dealt with, doing away with customary intestate succession law and practice. Many more of our customary practices are no longer legally possible or permissible. By legislation, customary servitude[4], compulsion of marriage[5], trial by ordeal[6] and female circumcision[7] and others which all used to be normal cultural practices, have been outlawed.
CONCLUSION:
What can we say to these things?
There is an Akan adage which states, “mmere dane a, dane bi” to wit, loosely, “when times change, people (or things) must also change”. Without going into the details of what reforms should be made, the general idea is to have the law reflect the reality. One of the basic considerations for the passage of PNDCL 111 was the fact of marriage being an economic relationship. The law was made to reflect the fact of the contributions made by both spouses in the marital relationship.
In the same manner, it has become obvious that the extended family in most situations is unable to lead and finance funerals without relying on the spouse and children. In that case, should it not be the one funding who should determine what should be done? The situation of barring spouses and children from funerals or having tension and venom-filled funeral meetings should be a thing of the past. Grieving family members should not also be engaged in fights.
It is proposed that in light of these developments in our society, the Law Reform Commission should consider the development of legislation to deal with the unanticipated impact of the passage and enforcement of the Intestate Succession Act, 1985 (PNDL111) on current family roles or duties with respect to the burial and final funeral rites of the deceased particularly who makes the arrangements and incidental to that, who bears the cost to prevent antagonistic family brawls. The Intestate Succession Bill which is yet to be passed into legislation can possibly address the necessary reforms.
We need to have peaceful send-offs for our dear departed relatives, and, when our time comes, our loved ones ought not to grieve our passing and then ill-treatment.
[1] https://gij.edu.gh/gij-news/omanhene-of-new-juaben-traditional-area-to-attend-2024-ghana-monthdurbar-at-unimac-ij-2/
[2] Family Ties, Inheritance Rights, and Successful Poverty Alleviation: Evidence from Ghana (2012)
(Available online at https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c13378/revisions/c13378.rev0.pdf)
[3] NEEQUAYE & ANOR. v. OKOE [1993-94] 1 GLR 538; NSIAH v. AMEYAW II [1994-96] 2 GBR 583-592
[4] Please see section 314A of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29 as amended)
[5] Section 109 of Act 29
[6] Section 315 of Act 29
[7] Section 69A of Act 29