Renowned constitutional law scholar, Professor Henry Kwasi Prempeh, has issued a scathing rebuke of any attempts to reinterpret Ghana’s presidential term limits, describing such moves as “illegitimate and bogus.”
In a statement posted on his Facebook page, the Executive Director of the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) dismissed arguments calling for a judicial review of Article 66(1) of the 1992 Constitution, which limits presidents to two terms in office.
Also Read: Eating humble pie: NPP to ‘drag Wontumi’ to President Mahama to beg
“There is nothing to interpret about the presidential limit provision in the 1992 Constitution. None whatsoever,” Prof. Prempeh wrote, adding that the text is unambiguous and does not warrant any form of judicial intervention.
Taking aim at what he described as a creeping trend of “Ghana-style modern purposive interpretation,” Prof. Prempeh warned against judicial overreach, arguing that such interpretive tactics could dangerously undermine the clarity and authority of the Constitution.
“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,” he stated. “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 mean two terms.”
He drew a clear distinction between Article 66(1) and Article 246(2), which refers to “two consecutive terms” for District Chief Executives. Prof. Prempeh stressed that the omission of the word “consecutive” in Article 66(1) was intentional and should not be misconstrued.
His comments come in response to growing speculation that a legal petition could be filed at the Supreme Court, seeking to reinterpret the presidential term limit in a way that could potentially open the door for a third term under specific conditions.
“This matter must be laid to rest,” he insisted. “The Supreme Court is not omnipotent,” he stressed.