Ghana’s term-limit battle widens as five Supreme Court cases collide with calls for constitutional amendment
Keypoints:
- Five Article 66 cases are pending
- Presidential staffer raises amendment route
- Mahama says mandate is one additional term
GHANA’S presidential term-limit controversy has widened beyond the Supreme Court after a presidential staffer openly suggested that the Constitution could be amended through a national referendum to allow President John Dramani Mahama to seek another term.
Anthony Nukpenu, a Presidential Staffer for Political Affairs and Greater Accra Regional Organiser of the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC), said on August 28 that constitutional amendment offered another route besides waiting for the Supreme Court to settle competing interpretations of Article 66.
The intervention adds a significant political dimension to a dispute that was largely centred on constitutional interpretation when the Article 66 cases first emerged. Five actions are now pending before the Supreme Court, while the government is separately pushing ahead with a wider constitutional reform programme.
Five cases now before Supreme Court
Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem-Sai disclosed on August 14 that five cases concerning presidential term limits were pending before the Supreme Court.
The actions were filed by Azubila E. Salam, Kenneth K.A. Kuranchie, Ganiwu Alhassan and Eric Appiah, with the opposition New Patriotic Party becoming the fifth plaintiff after filing its case on July 30.
The NPP’s entry gives the controversy added institutional and political weight. However, publicly available reports reviewed by Africa Briefing do not establish the precise declarations or other reliefs the party is seeking.
Article 66(2) provides that a person cannot be elected president for more than two terms. The litigation has fuelled debate over whether the provision leaves any room to distinguish between consecutive and non-consecutive terms.
No authoritative report reviewed by Africa Briefing has established that the Supreme Court has issued a substantive ruling resolving that question.
Nukpenu raises amendment option
Nukpenu argued that the NDC’s parliamentary strength could enable it to pursue constitutional amendment and ultimately put the issue to voters.
His argument follows the NDC’s rise to a two-thirds parliamentary threshold after its Ablekuma North victory. As Africa Briefing reported when the NDC secured its parliamentary super-majority, the numbers give the governing party substantial legislative power but do not allow it to alter entrenched constitutional provisions on its own.
Article 290 identifies Chapter Eight of the Constitution, which contains Article 66, as entrenched. Amending it therefore requires the procedure reserved for entrenched provisions, including consideration by the Council of State, publication in the Gazette and approval through a national referendum.
At least 40 percent of eligible registered voters must participate in such a referendum, and at least 75 percent of votes cast must support the amendment for it to succeed.
The NDC’s parliamentary strength is therefore politically significant, but it cannot by itself rewrite Ghana’s presidential term limit.
Mahama rejects third-term ambition
Nukpenu’s intervention also differs sharply from Mahama’s publicly stated position.
Speaking during his Resetting Ghana Tour in July, Mahama said his understanding of the constitutional provision was clear and stressed that voters had given him ‘one additional term’. He said his focus was on fulfilling that mandate.
There is no evidence that Mahama authorised or endorsed Nukpenu’s proposal.
The comments also contrast with the NDC’s earlier categorical rejection of attempts to alter presidential term limits. Africa Briefing reported that Ghana’s ruling party had ruled out changing presidential term limits, saying it had no intention of sponsoring or supporting such a move.
That distinction is important because the latest proposal comes from a presidential staffer and senior regional party official rather than from Mahama, the Presidency or an announced decision of the NDC’s national leadership.
Wider constitutional reform advances
The controversy comes as the government moves forward with a separate and much broader constitutional reform process.
Among the proposals under consideration is an increase in individual presidential terms from four years to five years. The recommendation was originally presented as an attempt to reduce Ghana’s near-permanent election cycle rather than loosen the country’s two-term presidential ceiling Africa Briefing examined the proposed five-year presidential term when the Constitutional Review Committee presented its recommendations.
The government subsequently accepted key constitutional reform proposals, while Mahama has announced plans for a national referendum on proposed amendments to entrenched constitutional provisions alongside the 2027 District Assembly Elections.
The process advanced again on August 29 when Attorney-General Dominic Ayine inaugurated an 11-member Constitution Review Implementation Committee chaired by Presidential Legal Counsel Marietta Agyeiwaa Brew.
The committee will examine the government’s position paper and develop a framework for implementing the wider reform proposals.
There is no evidence that allowing Mahama another presidential run forms part of the committee’s mandate.
The next decisive development in the Article 66 litigation will be an authoritative Supreme Court hearing notice, procedural direction or ruling. Until then, Ghana’s presidential term-limit controversy is playing out simultaneously in the courts, party politics and the country’s broader constitutional reform process.