Kwaku Antwi-Agyei, Esq, writes
It is explicitly stated at Article 66(2) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana that: “A person shall not be elected to hold office as President of Ghana for more than two terms.”
Article 66(1) of the same Constitution reads; “A person elected as President shall, subject to clause (3) of this article, hold office for a term of four years beginning from the date on which he is sworn in as President.”
The combined effect of the above-cited article 66 (1) and (2) of the Constitution is that every term of office of the President shall be four years and if upon attaining the first four years, the sitting President is desirous of going for another four years, he is eligible to do so. However, if a President can win elections for a second term, he can only serve the 2nd four-year term (which means eight years of service) and that ends the number of years the President can serve.
President Mahama is serving his second four-year term now and on 7th January 2029, he is expected to hand over power to his successor just as President Akufo-Addo handed over power to him after serving his 2nd four-year term.
This is so clear and unambiguous that even an ordinary man on the streets of Kejetia understands. So, I was taken by surprise when speculations were rife in the media that, President Mahama intends to seek a 3rd term in office as President of Ghana.
What I find intriguing about this whole narrative is the impression created in the minds of Ghanaians of some sense of entitlement on the part of my NDC folks.
Should they have attempted to amend the Constitution to give effect to this mirage, it would have been chaotic just as it would have been a miserable failure.
Article 290 of the 1992 Constitution has listed the entrenched provisions, which also includes Chapter 8 on the executive arm of government (encapsulating Article 66 of the Constitution on the term of office of the President).
An entrenched provision of the Constitution cannot be amended by Parliament unless it has gone through a referendum where 40% of all registered voters must vote and 75% of those who vote during the referendum must cast their votes in favor of the bill submitted for the amendment. It is after the referendum is done in favor of the amendment that Parliament comes in to pass the bill into law.
From the procedure outlined in the Constitution for the amendment of an entrenched provision of the Constitution, it does suggest that the amendment could be very cumbersome and rigorous.
I therefore find it very preposterous to hear the President himself and the chairman of the NDC party say that President Mahama would not run for a 3rd term, as if it was his right, which he has relinquished. This is because the 3rd term bid is not only unconstitutional, but it was never envisaged by the framers of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
In fact, President Mahama had no other option but to hand over power to his successor at the end of his 2nd four-year term. They should not create any wrong impression that they have done Ghanaians a favor by saying the President would not run for a 3rd term because they have no other choice.
This is my honest opinion.
(The writer is a private legal practitioner)
