Former Attorney General Martin Amidu has dismissed claims that Alhaji Inusah Abdul Majeed Badigamsira was arrested solely for sharing his articles on the Bawku mediation, insisting the youth association executive faces separate criminal allegations.
Amidu issued a detailed statement on December 27 responding to a press release attributed to the Nayiri that suggested Badigamsira’s December 23 arrest stemmed from sharing his writings while Amidu himself remained free. The former Special Prosecutor described this characterization as “mischievous” and factually incorrect.
“I cannot by any imagination believe that the law enforcement agencies arrested Alhaji Badigamsira on 23 December 2025 only for sharing any or both of the two articles I had written and published on 15 December 2025,” Amidu stated, adding that neither article violated Ghana’s criminal laws.
The legal practitioner revealed that intelligence at his disposal indicated Badigamsira and another individual had been under suspicion since 2021 for various criminal offences. He noted that Badigamsira did not share his article directly but rather a news report about it.
The Mamprugu Traditional Council claimed Badigamsira’s arrest was solely for sharing a document authored by Martin Amidu on the mediation process, while the author himself was not questioned, describing this as selective justice.
Amidu countered that security agencies have legal obligations when making arrests, including showing warrants or informing suspects of reasons in a language they understand. He cited the case of Alhaji Seidu Abagre, who received an ex parte order for continued detention at an Adenta court on December 26, suggesting proper legal procedures were followed.
“I believe that no court would have ordered his continued detention merely because he shared any of my articles before and after the Bawku Mediation Report was presented to the public at the Jubilee House on 16 December 2025,” Amidu wrote.
The former Attorney General outlined his long involvement in Bawku affairs, dating to 1983 when he served as Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) Deputy Secretary for the Upper East Region. He presided over regional administration during the enskinment of the current Bawku Naba in April 1984 following the promulgation of the Chieftaincy (Restoration of Status of Chiefs) Law (PNDCL 75).
Amidu clarified his articles published December 15 and December 19 questioned the constitutional and legal basis for appointing a mediator in Bawku affairs, not the legitimacy of the current Bawku Naba’s enskinment. He maintained the Bawku Naba was lawfully gazetted under the PNDC and remains the subsisting paramount chief under the 1992 Constitution.
“Alhaji Badigamsira certainly does not share the views I have held since the promulgation of PNDCL 75 on 21 December 1983 for which reason I agreed to be the lawyer for the Bawku Naba at the Supreme Court in 2003,” Amidu noted, explaining why the youth leader could not have been arrested for sharing his legal positions.
The former Special Prosecutor questioned the authenticity of the press release attributed to the Nayiri, noting traditional protocol requires important documents prepared in the overlord’s name to be signed by his secretary or accompanied by a jurat verifying the document was read to him in a language he understands.
The Mamprugu Traditional Council condemned both the arrest of Alhaji Seidu Abagre, who was enskinned as Bawku Naaba by the Nayiri in February 2023, and the December 23 arrest of Badigamsira at his Gbimsi residence.
Amidu maintained his position that President John Mahama, who stated on February 3, 2024, that there is no chieftaincy conflict in Bawku because there is only one known king, had no lawful grounds to appoint a mediator on matters already settled under the Constitution. He argued the mediation allowed more citizens to lose their lives needlessly through continued violence between January 7 and December 16, 2025.
The legal veteran defended his right as a citizen to question the constitutional basis of the mediation, particularly after the government announced a public presentation of the report at Jubilee House. He noted the mediation was funded by public resources, entitling citizens to demand accountability and legal justification.