Evans Teye Estate Development Limited has debunked allegations that it is terrorising residents of Ogbojo in Accra with land guards, insisting that it is pursuing peaceful and lawful means to protect its interest in a disputed 100.784-acre property.
The company said claims that it had deployed land guards to intimidate, harass or unlawfully evict occupants were false, maintaining that its preferred approach is dialogue and the regularisation of the interests of people who have already developed portions of the land.
Addressing a press conference in Accra, Managing Director of Evans Teye Estate Development Limited, Mr John Lomotey Teye, said the company had no interest in creating fear or forcibly displacing residents.
“We are not terrorising anybody. We are not interested in terrorising people. We just need peace on our land,” Mr Teye said.
He explained that the company has security personnel who occasionally patrol the property to monitor activities and report new or unauthorised developments, but stressed that they have no mandate to harass residents.
According to him, whenever unauthorised construction is detected, the company resorts to the appropriate authorities, including the police, to intervene.
“People are starting to build, and we tell our security personnel not to allow anybody who is starting to build to continue. They should report to us. A few times, they have reported that some people were building, and we have gone there with the police to stop them lawfully,” he said.
Mr Teye said the company’s priority is to resolve the longstanding dispute peacefully while protecting what it maintains is its legally registered interest in the property.
“Our preference is regularisation and peaceful resolution. But the lawful rights of Evans Teye Estate Limited will be protected,” he stated.
According to the company, the property measures approximately 100.784 acres and is covered by Land Title Certificate No. GA0454, Volume 018, Folio 165.
Mr Teye said Evans Teye Estate acquired the land from the Anohor and Dzrasee families of Ogbojo, represented at the time by Nii Jonathan E. Sai Obodai, through transactions undertaken in June 1979 and August 1989.
The land subsequently became the subject of litigation involving the La Stool and the Anohor and Dzrasee families.
Mr Teye cited the Supreme Court case of Nii Ago Sai v Nii Kpobi Tettey Tsuru III and 2 Others, Civil Appeal No. J4/21/2008, decided on March 24, 2010, as significant to the company’s claim.
According to Evans Teye Estate, the judgment affirmed the rights of the Anohor and Dzrasee families in relation to the Ogbojo lands and recognised that the company had acquired its interest from them.
The company said it also holds registered instruments, including a Land Title Certificate, covering its interest in the property.
Mr Teye said an injunction had been in place during the litigation, restraining the parties, their agents, assigns and persons claiming through them from disposing of the affected lands.
Regularisation Instead of Confrontation
Mr Teye said that following the Supreme Court decision, the company opened a regularisation exercise to allow people who had already developed portions of the property without its authorisation to resolve their interests.
He clarified that the exercise applies to people who have already built on the land and not to undeveloped plots.
“If you are already on the land and have built on it, come forward and speak to us. Let us see what land size you have, negotiate and allow you to pay for it. That is what we mean by regularising,” he explained.
He said several occupants had already approached the company after seeking legal advice, leading to the execution of Deeds of Assignment in their favour.
Mr Teye cited Alhaji Zakaria, whom he described as one of the earliest occupants of a portion of the land, as an example of the company’s preference for negotiation.
According to him, the company initiated legal proceedings against Alhaji Zakaria after the Supreme Court judgment and obtained a writ of possession.
However, rather than enforce the writ in a manner that could have resulted in the demolition of the development, the company opted for dialogue.
Mr Teye said Alhaji Zakaria subsequently approached the company to regularise his interest, with the process now nearing completion.
“This is important because it demonstrates that Evans Teye Estate is not interested in unnecessarily displacing people. Our objective is to protect our lawful title while providing a reasonable opportunity for genuine occupants to regularise their interests and bring lasting peace to the area,” he said.
Company Challenges Rival Claimants
Evans Teye Estate also challenged persons claiming ownership of portions of the disputed property to produce their documents for examination alongside the company’s registered title and relevant court judgments.
The company further alleged that Jonas Obodai and persons associated with the Numo Okotse Adja Family had granted portions of the property to third parties while litigation was pending, despite an injunction relating to the land.
It said the Madina Divisional Police Command and the Property Fraud Unit of the Criminal Investigation Department were pursuing matters concerning some of the alleged transactions.
The allegations against Mr Obodai have not been independently established, and his response was not contained in the company’s statement.
Mr Teye maintained that competing claims over the property should be determined by documentary evidence and relevant court decisions rather than confrontation.
Evans Teye Estate further alleged that discussions had previously taken place involving Mr Obodai and its lawyers concerning the regularisation of individuals who had acquired portions of the property through other parties.
According to the company, its lawyers rejected a proposal involving an additional amount or commission beyond the prescribed regularisation fee.
The estate said it had records of the engagements and was prepared to provide them to the appropriate authorities where necessary. It also challenged Mr Obodai to respond to the allegation.
Mr Teye maintained that questions surrounding ownership should be determined by registered land documents, applicable court judgments and the law.
He cautioned that physical occupation alone did not establish legal ownership, noting that possession or adverse possession must be determined in accordance with the law.
October Deadline for Occupants
Meanwhile, Evans Teye Estate has extended its regularisation exercise to the end of October 2026, giving affected occupants another opportunity to engage the company.
Mr Teye said an earlier window did not receive the expected response, partly because of conflicting claims and statements from other parties.
“We had already given them some time, but it did not go down well because of the things being said by the other party. So we are using this opportunity to extend the period to the end of October for everybody to come and regularise,” he said.
Interested occupants are expected to provide their details, indicate how they intend to make payment and engage the company on the regularisation process.
The company said it would resort to lawful processes to protect its interests where disputes remained unresolved after the deadline.
Mr Teye said the company’s peaceful approach was influenced by his late father, Evans Teye, who pursued the land dispute through the courts for about 25 years.
“My father went to court for 25 years. We have taken over, and our children can also take over one day. But he taught us that we should be peaceful in everything. That is what we are doing by allowing people to come and regularise peacefully and be happy on the land,” he said.
Residents Back Regularisation Exercise
Archbishop Dr Kwaku Nsiah Agyarko, who has lived in the area for about 30 years, backed Evans Teye Estate Development Limited’s regularisation exercise, urging other affected occupants to engage the company to resolve outstanding land issues peacefully.
Archbishop Agyarko said he acquired his plot in 1996 from an individual in Ogbojo but later discovered that the property fell within land claimed by Evans Teye Estate.
He said he subsequently decided to engage the company and began making payments under the regularisation arrangement.
“I started paying small, small,” he said, adding that the company issued him a receipt acknowledging his payment.
Although he is yet to complete the process and receive his final deed, Archbishop Agyarko said the arrangement had brought some reassurance to his household.
“Notwithstanding, they haven’t given us the deed because we haven’t finished. But at least there is peace in my house,” he said.
He urged other affected occupants to engage the company and examine the documents supporting its claim rather than resorting to confrontation.
“If they had been to the meeting, they would see that the people indeed have documents. So why do we fight them?” he asked.
Archbishop Agyarko said the payment arrangement allows affected occupants to pay in instalments, adding that he had seen about five people complete the process and have their documents prepared through the Lands Commission.
Another resident, Ms Angela Carson, said she was unaware of any harassment of residents in the area, maintaining that officials were only engaging occupants to regularise their land documents.
Ms Carson said she purchased her land in 2000 and was issued a Deed of Assignment before subsequently securing a land title in 2018.
She said her ownership was later challenged in court by a man who claimed the land belonged to his nephew, but the case was eventually dismissed in 2022.
“The case went on until 2022 and was eventually thrown out of court, after which I built and I am currently resident here,” she said.
Ms Carson said she now had peace of mind over the property, citing the outcome of the court case and her possession of the land.
