Renowned constitutional law expert, Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh, has firmly rejected any move to reinterpret Article 66(1) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, calling such attempts “illegitimate and bogus.”
In a strongly-worded statement shared on Facebook, the Executive Director of CDD-Ghana insisted the Constitution is unequivocal on presidential term limits and requires no judicial interpretation.
“There is nothing to interpret about the presidential term limit provision in the 1992 Constitution. None whatsoever,” he asserted.
Prof. Prempeh took aim at what he described as a “Ghana-style modern purposive interpretation,” arguing it grants judges undue power to distort clear constitutional provisions.
“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 emphasised.
He pointed out that the framers of the Constitution were deliberate in their language, referencing Article 246(2), which limits District Chief Executives to “two consecutive terms”—a specific phrasing intentionally absent from Article 66(1).
Prof. Prempeh’s intervention comes amid mounting public concern over reports that the Supreme Court may be asked to interpret term limits in a way that could permit a third presidential term under certain conditions.
“This matter must be laid to rest. The Supreme Court is not omnipotent,” he stated.
