Renowned constitutional law expert, Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh, has waded into the ongoing debate over presidential term limits in Ghana, dismissing any attempt to reinterpret Article 66(1) of the 1992 Constitution as “illegitimate and bogus.”
In a strongly-worded statement on Facebook, the Executive Director of CDD-Ghana argued that the Constitution is unambiguous on the issue and does not require judicial interpretation to clarify.
“There is nothing to interpret about the presidential term limit provision in the 1992 Constitution. None whatsoever,” he stated.
Prof. Kwasi Prempeh criticized what he described as a “Ghana-style modern purposive interpretation” that, in his view, gives judges excessive leeway to alter clear constitutional language.
“Any interpretation of Article 66(1) to the effect that a President who has been elected to a second term can stand election again (i.e., a third time) is illegitimate and bogus. Judges do not have authority to rewrite or amend a provision of the Constitution whose text and purpose admit of only one meaning. Two terms means two terms,” he stressed.
He noted that the framers of the Constitution were precise in their drafting, pointing to Article 246(2), which explicitly restricts District Chief Executives to “two consecutive terms”—a wording that was deliberately not used in Article 66(1).
Prof. Prempeh’s remarks come amid growing public concern over suggestions that the Supreme Court could be petitioned to interpret presidential term limits in a way that might allow a third term under certain conditions.
“This matter must be laid to rest. The Supreme Court is not omnipotent,” he stressed.
