A senior official of the Ghana Maritime Authority, Mubarick Masawudu, has been accused of interfering by backing a faction in a land dispute case which is before a court in Accra.
The official’s connection with the faction in litigation is not clear but he is alleged to be using land guards and his position to take over a parcel of land at Spintex, Accra, in a dispute that has now found its way before the High Court.
The allegations concern a parcel of land which the applicants say forms part of property acquired through Samuel Kofi Diame, also referred to in documents relating to the transaction, and which is now the subject of an injunction application before the High Court, Land Division, Accra.
The dispute is the subject of Suit No. LD/0516/2026, involving Mr Artin Kassardjian and Mrs Haykouhi Kassardjian as applicants and Abdul Razak, Amos Sowah Pablo Annan and The Developer as respondents.
A certified court order dated August 27, 2026, issued by the High Court, Land Division Eleven, Accra, authorised substituted service of the injunction application and originating motion by posting copies of the processes at the Land Division of the Law Court Complex and on the land in dispute at Spintex, Accra.
The order further directed that the notice remain posted for 21 days.
LANDS COMMISSION RECORD
Significantly, an Official Certificate of Result of Search issued by the Lands Commission on July 22, 2026, provides a documentary history of dealings concerning the land.
The search, conducted for BAFLA Ltd, records a lease dated December 7, 2017 from Nuumo Adjei Kwanko II to Samuel Kofi Diame, followed by a judgment dated July 9, 2018 in favour of Samuel Kofi Diame, under Suit No. LD/0424/2017.
The same Lands Commission search also records that the land is affected by a plotted activity for Joemat Real Estate Development Limited, with Samuel Kofi Diame identified as grantor. A subsequent registry entry states that the property is affected by Land Certificate No. GA56155 issued to Joemat Real Estate Development Limited, with Samuel Kofi Diame as grantor.
The search is therefore likely to become a critical document in determining the competing interests in the property.
JOEMAT LAND CERTIFICATE
The Land Certificate exhibited in the documents is issued under the authority of the Land Title Registry, Accra.
It states that Joemat Real Estate Development Limited is registered as tenant or lessee for the unexpired residue of a 99-year lease commencing December 7, 2007, covering approximately 24.42 hectares (60.33 acres) at Spintex, Greater Accra Region.
The property is identified as Parcel No. 7359, Block 2, Section 097, and is delineated on Registry Map No. 002/097/1992.
The accompanying registry plan identifies the locality as Spintex, in the Greater Accra Region, and gives the parcel as 7359, Block 2, Section 097.
The documentary record consequently raises questions about how the various interests in the property arose, how the land was subsequently dealt with, and whether the portion currently being developed falls within the land covered by those instruments.
‘LAND GUARDS’ ALLEGATION
The latest development has, however, moved the dispute beyond competing documents and into an allegation of physical interference with possession of the land.
According to information available to this newspaper, Mr Masawudu who is the Deputy Maritime Authority Director is alleged to have appeared at the disputed site in circumstances in which persons described as land guards were allegedly used to facilitate the takeover or continued occupation of the property.
It is further alleged that police officers were present at the site but that, after the police left, the persons at the site allegedly continued with activities on the disputed property.
The allegations are contained in information supplied to this newspaper and are not being presented as established facts.
The significance of the allegation is heightened by the fact that the dispute is already before the High Court and an order has been made for substituted service of the injunction proceedings on the respondents and by posting the processes on the disputed land.
DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES
Photographs of the site show substantial construction activity, including block work, reinforced concrete columns and structures at various stages of construction.
The images indicate that development is ongoing on the disputed site, despite the existence of the court proceedings and the order directing that the injunction processes be posted on the property.
This raises a further question for the court: who is presently exercising control over the land, under what authority, and whether any continuing development is consistent with the rights asserted by the competing parties.
POWER AND PUBLIC OFFICE
The allegation involving Mr Masawudu also raises questions about the appropriate conduct of public officials where private property disputes are concerned.
A public official’s position, by itself, does not confer proprietary rights over privately disputed land. Any allegation that official influence was used to secure possession of property would therefore be a matter requiring serious examination by the relevant authorities.
But at this stage, the central issue remains one for determination through the appropriate legal process: which party has the superior legal interest in the land and whether the conduct complained of amounts to unlawful interference with that interest.
CALL FOR ANSWERS
The circumstances surrounding the Spintex property therefore warrant closer scrutiny, particularly given the documentary trail contained in the Lands Commission search, the registered land certificate and the pending High Court proceedings.
Mr Masawudu should be given an opportunity to respond to the allegations, including:
- whether he was present at the disputed property;
- whether he has any proprietary or contractual interest in the land;
- whether he instructed, engaged or authorised any persons described as land guards to enter or remain on the property;
- whether he was involved in the ongoing development;
- and whether he has any explanation for the continued activities on the site while the dispute is before the High Court.
The allegations against Mr Masawudu remain allegations and have not been judicially determined.
The eventual determination of the High Court, together with the documentary evidence and any evidence concerning events at the site, should establish the respective rights of the parties.
At the heart of the controversy is a simple but consequential question: who lawfully owns or controls the disputed Spintex land, and by what authority is physical possession presently being exercised?
Attempts to get a response from Mubarick Masawudu regarding the allegations proved futile as at the time of going to press.
Click on the links below to open the documents
kassadjian-1st Injunction Application
kassajan-2nd Injunction application-In Adams’ case
proof of service of 1st application
kassajan-Statement of Defence to Adams’ case
Final_Constitution_Review_TUC Position_.docx 2
Mubarick Masawudu Puppy OSMAN the chief Landguad
