25/02/2026
Widow Alleges Intimidation as Lawyer Orders Exhumation of Late Husband’s Remains in Bamenda Land Dispute
The widow of the late Che Ngwa Gandhi, who died while in military detention in Bamenda in 1992, has raised alarm over what she describes as intimidation and an attempt to desecrate her husband’s grave following a long-running land dispute.
Dr Anna Nkapsah Nji, widow of the deceased, says she recently received a letter from Stanly Muluh of Loyalty Law Firm, demanding that she exhume and relocate her husband’s remains within 30 days. The directive, she says, stems from a disputed claim of ownership over the family compound where her husband was buried more than three decades ago.
According to Dr Nkapsah, the land in question was ceded to her late husband by his grandmother and has remained a family home since his burial in 1992. The dispute reportedly intensified recently after a court order obtained by way of motion ex parte led to the transfer of the land certificate from the late Che Ngwa Gandhi to Mbonjum Joseph Ngang. She alleges that the property was subsequently sold, within two weeks, to two companies, Star Business Consulting Limited and MAF Holding Incorporated Limited, which she claims are owned by Barrister Muluh and Tamukong Martin Ntungfor.
Dr Nkapsah says she first became aware of changes surrounding the property after her sister, who resides there and oversees the house, reported the presence of individuals taking measurements around the compound. Subsequent inquiries at the survey office allegedly confirmed recent alterations to the property’s ownership status.
In a letter dated February 20, 2026, lawyers acting for Mbonjum Joseph Ngang wrote that they represent the interests of Star Business Consulting Limited and MAF Holding Incorporated Limited, whom they described as the lawful owners of the property covered by Land Certificate No. 5683, Volume 28, Folio 172, Mezam Division. The letter further claimed that the late Che Ngwa Gandhi was “inadvertently interred” on the property in 1992 and informed the widow of the intention to commence earthworks, citing construction activities linked to the Bamenda Urban Cross project.
The legal notice stated that should Dr Nkapsah wish to preserve the grave, she must arrange for its relocation within 30 days of receipt of the letter, failing which construction would proceed “without further delay.”
Speaking emotionally, Dr Nkapsah rejected the demand, describing the compound as her family’s maternal home and a place of deep historical and emotional significance. She explained that her late husband had begun construction on the house before his death and was buried there by his grandmother, who had given him the land. The grandmother herself was later buried behind the same house in 2008.
She further alleged that following the grandmother’s death, Mbonjum Joseph Ngang, a nephew of the deceased grandmother, emerged to claim ownership of the land, triggering years of court battles. Dr Nkapsah insists she never sold the property and questions the legality of the transfer and subsequent sale to the two companies.
“This is not just land; it is my life’s investment and my children’s heritage,” she said. “I left Cameroon in 1996, worked tirelessly abroad, and invested my earnings into building these structures for my retirement. My son even named it ‘Gandhi Compound’ to preserve his father’s memory.”
The widow also accused Barrister Muluh of a conflict of interest, alleging that while he claims to represent the purchasing companies, he is himself one of their owners. She further recounted earlier attempts by Tamukong Martin Ntungfor to rent and complete the building, which she declined due to suspicions over the arrangement.
“I just want my husband to rest in peace,” Dr Nkapsah lamented. “It is not my intention to bury him twice. He was buried before the eyes of the entire Bamenda community. After 34 years, what do they expect to find in that grave?”
Calling for public sympathy and legal redress, the widow appealed for protection against what she described as the abuse of power and intimidation of a grieving family. “I have nothing else but this compound and my husband’s memory,” she said. “No amount of money can justify disturbing the dead.”*Widow Alleges Intimidation as Lawyer Orders Exhumation of Late Husband’s Remains in Bamenda Land Dispute*
The widow of the late Che Ngwa Gandhi, who died while in military detention in Bamenda in 1992, has raised alarm over what she describes as intimidation and an attempt to desecrate her husband’s grave following a long-running land dispute.
Dr Anna Nkapsah Nji, widow of the deceased, says she recently received a letter from Stanly Muluh of Loyalty Law Firm, demanding that she exhume and relocate her husband’s remains within 30 days. The directive, she says, stems from a disputed claim of ownership over the family compound where her husband was buried more than three decades ago.
According to Dr Nkapsah, the land in question was ceded to her late husband by his grandmother and has remained a family home since his burial in 1992. The dispute reportedly intensified recently after a court order obtained by way of motion ex parte led to the transfer of the land certificate from the late Che Ngwa Gandhi to Mbonjum Joseph Ngang. She alleges that the property was subsequently sold, within two weeks, to two companies, Star Business Consulting Limited and MAF Holding Incorporated Limited, which she claims are owned by Barrister Muluh and Tamukong Martin Ntungfor.
Dr Nkapsah says she first became aware of changes surrounding the property after her sister, who resides there and oversees the house, reported the presence of individuals taking measurements around the compound. Subsequent inquiries at the survey office allegedly confirmed recent alterations to the property’s ownership status.
In a letter dated February 20, 2026, lawyers acting for Mbonjum Joseph Ngang wrote that they represent the interests of Star Business Consulting Limited and MAF Holding Incorporated Limited, whom they described as the lawful owners of the property covered by Land Certificate No. 5683, Volume 28, Folio 172, Mezam Division. The letter further claimed that the late Che Ngwa Gandhi was “inadvertently interred” on the property in 1992 and informed the widow of the intention to commence earthworks, citing construction activities linked to the Bamenda Urban Cross project.
The legal notice stated that should Dr Nkapsah wish to preserve the grave, she must arrange for its relocation within 30 days of receipt of the letter, failing which construction would proceed “without further delay.”
Speaking emotionally, Dr Nkapsah rejected the demand, describing the compound as her family’s maternal home and a place of deep historical and emotional significance. She explained that her late husband had begun construction on the house before his death and was buried there by his grandmother, who had given him the land. The grandmother herself was later buried behind the same house in 2008.
She further alleged that following the grandmother’s death, Mbonjum Joseph Ngang, a nephew of the deceased grandmother, emerged to claim ownership of the land, triggering years of court battles. Dr Nkapsah insists she never sold the property and questions the legality of the transfer and subsequent sale to the two companies.
“This is not just land; it is my life’s investment and my children’s heritage,” she said. “I left Cameroon in 1996, worked tirelessly abroad, and invested my earnings into building these structures for my retirement. My son even named it ‘Gandhi Compound’ to preserve his father’s memory.”
The widow also accused Barrister Muluh of a conflict of interest, alleging that while he claims to represent the purchasing companies, he is himself one of their owners. She further recounted earlier attempts by Tamukong Martin Ntungfor to rent and complete the building, which she declined due to suspicions over the arrangement.
“I just want my husband to rest in peace,” Dr Nkapsah lamented. “It is not my intention to bury him twice. He was buried before the eyes of the entire Bamenda community. After 34 years, what do they expect to find in that grave?”
Calling for public sympathy and legal redress, the widow appealed for protection against what she described as the abuse of power and intimidation of a grieving family. “I have nothing else but this compound and my husband’s memory,” she said. “No amount of money can justify disturbing the dead.”
