- Accra Turf Club Demolition Investigation Deepens With Arrest Of Dr Clemence Gyato
The Criminal Investigation Department of the Ghana Police Service has arrested Dr Clemence Gyato in connection with the controversial demolition and reported takeover of the Accra Race Course at Borteyman, according to a police statement.
Dr Gyato was reportedly taken into custody on Thursday, September 10, 2026, as investigators seek to establish who authorised the August operation and the circumstances under which the racecourse was demolished.
The arrest marks a significant escalation in a case that has drawn growing public pressure from the horse-racing community and raised questions about the possible involvement of security personnel.
The investigation centres on events of Saturday, August 22, when the Accra Turf Club says about 200 armed men entered its Borteyman facility with heavy-duty equipment and carried out extensive demolition works.
The Club has alleged that the group arrived with nine bulldozers and an excavator and destroyed horse stables, racing infrastructure and other facilities across the property. Independent reports of the Club’s account confirm that it alleged roughly 100 horse stables were demolished and horses and jockeys were forcibly displaced.
Dr Gyato is currently reported to be assisting the CID with investigations, but the fact of his arrest does not establish criminal liability. The police probe is expected to examine the legal basis for the demolition, the ownership or possession claims surrounding the property and who directed the security arrangements on the day.
Those distinctions will be important because competing claims over land can produce civil disputes, while the use of force, police personnel or demolition without lawful authority can raise separate criminal and disciplinary questions.
The arrest follows the interdiction of DSP Alhassan Malaika Jibril, whom the Police Administration said was being investigated for his alleged involvement in the demolition exercise.
A police statement said the officer was interdicted to allow investigations into the circumstances surrounding the August 22 operation. The Accra Turf Club had earlier alleged that police officers accompanied those carrying out the demolition and identified DSP Malaika as being present at the scene.
The Turf Club has maintained that its Borteyman premises were entered forcibly and that the scale of destruction went well beyond a routine possession exercise.
In accounts published after the incident, the Club alleged that buildings, racing facilities, utility infrastructure, railings and vegetation were destroyed, while horses were removed from their stables and jockeys were ejected from residential areas.
The Club has described the episode as an unlawful takeover and repeatedly called for government and law-enforcement agencies to establish who authorised it.
The allegations have also raised questions about whether any valid court order, executive authority or other legal instrument existed to support the demolition.
The Turf Club said responding officers who came to the premises were told that documents existed to support the takeover, but it alleged that no court order authorising the demolition was produced at the scene.
Those claims remain allegations and will require documentary verification by investigators before responsibility can be established.
The legal question is particularly important because demolition disputes in Ghana often sit at the intersection of land ownership, possession rights, judicial orders and enforcement authority.
Even where one party has a legitimate claim to land, the manner in which possession is enforced can itself become unlawful if statutory processes are not followed. The CID investigation will therefore need to separate the underlying property dispute from the conduct of individuals and security officers involved in the operation.
Pressure on the authorities has intensified since the demolition, with members of Ghana’s horse-racing community demanding state intervention and accountability.
The Accra Turf Club has petitioned relevant ministries and called on President John Dramani Mahama and other state institutions to intervene, while demonstrations have sought to keep attention on the fate of the Borteyman facility. Earlier reports confirm that the Club appealed directly for an investigation and restoration of its possession of the property.
The dispute also carries significance beyond the immediate ownership question because the Accra Turf Club represents one of Ghana’s oldest organised sporting traditions. Horse racing in Accra dates back to the colonial era, while the Club itself has said its formal institutional history stretches back more than a century.
The destruction of the Borteyman facility has therefore been framed by stakeholders not only as a land dispute but as a threat to a historic sporting institution and the livelihoods connected to it.
For the Ghana Police Service, the case presents a test of institutional accountability because of the allegation that serving police personnel may have been involved in providing security for the demolition.
The interdiction of DSP Malaika signals that the Service recognises the need to establish whether officers acted within lawful authority and whether police resources were improperly deployed. Any finding of unauthorised police involvement would deepen the issue from a private land dispute into a question of state power and professional misconduct.
For Dr Gyato, the immediate issue is investigative rather than judicial determination. Police custody and questioning are part of the process of establishing facts, and any allegations against him will need to be tested through due process if charges are eventually brought.
Responsible reporting therefore requires that claims linking him to the demolition remain attributed to investigators and the Turf Club until the authorities disclose evidence or a court makes findings.
The case is likely to turn heavily on documentation: land title records, leases or allocations, court processes, correspondence with state agencies, instructions to police personnel and any agreements relating to possession of the site.
Those records should help establish whether the demolition had lawful backing and whether the individuals involved acted within or outside any authority they claimed to possess. Without that evidence, competing public narratives risk obscuring the central question of legal responsibility.
The CID’s arrest of Dr Gyato therefore represents an important step, but not the conclusion of the Borteyman controversy. What matters next is whether investigators can establish a clear chain of authorisation for the demolition, determine the role played by security personnel and identify any offences or breaches of procedure supported by evidence.
For the Accra Turf Club and the wider horse-racing community, the deeper demand remains the same: accountability for the destruction of the racecourse and clarity over who lawfully controls the Borteyman property.
