Daddy Lumba<\/a>, has evoked popular discourse on how these issues could play out between a\u00a0nuclear family\u2014the spouse (s) and children\u2014and the\u00a0extended family, within the framework of Ghanaian law.<\/p>\nIf the deceased legend left a valid will in accordance with the\u00a0Wills Act, 1971 (Act 360), then the terms of that document controls how the estate is distributed. This would include economic rights such as royalties, intellectual property, and real or personal property. A will can also direct burial arrangements, and Ghanaian courts will generally respect those written wishes, provided the will is valid.<\/p>\n
If the deceased died intestate (without a will), the\u00a0Intestate Succession Law, 1985 (PNDC Law 111)\u00a0applies to self-acquired property:<\/p>\n
The spouse and children receive the first share of the estate.<\/b><\/p>\n
The parents (unfortunately deceased) would have been entitled to a statutory
\nportion.<\/p>\n
Only what remains after these shares are distributed passes to the extended family under customary law.<\/b><\/p>\n
Where the parents have predeceased the deceased, and in this case they have, the
\nextended family\u2019s share is smaller and may only consist of residual property after the nuclear family\u2019s entitlements are satisfied.<\/p>\n
In the absence of a valid will or other legally binding direction regarding the
\ndisposition of one\u2019s remains, the issue of burial in Ghana is generally determined in accordance with applicable customary law. Under most Ghanaian customary systems, the right rests primarily with the Abusua\u2014the deceased\u2019s traditional family\u2014rather than the nuclear family. The Abusua, acting through its recognised head (often the Abusuapanyin), customarily decides both the location and manner of burial, taking into account the family\u2019s traditions, lineage, and ancestral grounds.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, if the Abusua resolves that the burial should take place at a specific location\u2014such as Nsuta\u2014that decision will ordinarily be binding and will prevail over the wishes of other parties, including the spouse and children, unless it can be shown to contravene statutory law, constitutional rights, or other overriding legal principles. Any challenge to such a decision would need to be mounted in a competent court, supported by evidence that the customary position should yield to legal provisions, testamentary directions, or equitable considerations.<\/p>\n
That said, courts have in some cases considered equitable factors\u2014such as the
\ndeceased\u2019s known wishes and the views of the spouse and children\u2014when resolving disputes about burial. Still, without a will, customary law remains the default position.<\/p>\n
Whether the deceased dies with or without a will, the estate must be formally
\nadministered through the courts. This is done via a grant of\u00a0probate\u00a0(for a will) or\u00a0letters of administration\u00a0(for intestacy). While family meetings may occur early in the process, only the court\u2019s grant gives legal authority to manage and distribute the estate. In celebrity cases, public image and family dignity may influence out- of-court settlements to avoid adverse media spectacle<\/p>\n
The fact that the deceased had strained or no personal contact with the extended
\nfamily does not nullify their customary role. Even where relations were strained, customary authority over burial is deeply entrenched. However, the nuclear family (spouse and children) may apply to court for injunctive relief or burial orders if they can show:<\/p>\n
The extended family\u2019s decision is unreasonable.<\/b><\/p>\n
It violates the dignity or wishes of the deceased.<\/b><\/p>\n
It causes undue hardship or conflict contrary to public interest.<\/b><\/p>\n
In my two decades of legal practice, I find that a clear, well-drafted will an
\neffective arsenal in preventing disputes after a person\u2019s death. In my experience, wills resolve as much as 85% of potential conflicts that typically arise among family members, beneficiaries, or interested parties. <\/p>\n
A properly executed will provides legal certainty, affirms the testator\u2019s intentions, and reduces ambiguity over the distribution of property, appointment of executors, and burial wishes. It empowers the surviving family to focus on mourning and remembrance rather than legal contention.<\/p>\n
Conversely, a poorly drafted, vague, or incomplete will can sow confusion and
\nbecome a fertile ground for disagreement and litigation. Ambiguities in language, omissions of key assets or beneficiaries, or failure to comply with formal legal requirements can result in protracted disputes that fracture families and consume estates in legal costs. <\/p>\n
In some instances, such poorly constructed wills are challenged in court and either invalidated or interpreted in ways that distort the original intent of the deceased. In short, while a good will brings peace, a flawed one can leave behind a legacy of conflict.<\/p>\n
Engaging a skilled estates lawyer to prepare or review your will is not only wise but essential. The technical requirements for a valid will under Ghanaian law are strict, and even minor errors in wording, execution, or witnessing can render an otherwise well-intentioned document ineffective. <\/p>\n
An experienced lawyer ensures that your will is drafted in clear, unambiguous language, complies with all statutory formalities, and fully reflects your intentions for the distribution of your estate and the handling of your final wishes.<\/p>\n
As our elders say, \u201cThe prudent person learns from the tribulations of others.\u201d The passing of a public figure often casts a spotlight on how quickly the period of grief can give way to disputes over property, burial rights, and legacy. Family harmony can be shattered, reputations tarnished, and estates diminished by legal battles that could have been avoided. A valid, well-drafted will remains a useful safeguard against such conflicts, providing certainty, preserving dignity, and ensuring that the focus after death remains on honoring the life lived rather than contesting its aftermath.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The death of a national icon often raises difficult legal and customary questions about who is entitled to…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":320779,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3093],"tags":[51,474,2499,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-320778","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-personal-finance","8":"tag-business","9":"tag-finance","10":"tag-personal-finance","11":"tag-uk","12":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114978214675351505","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320778","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=320778"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320778\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/320779"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=320778"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=320778"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=320778"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}