NPP seeks Supreme Court interpretation of presidential term limits

Party wants court to clarify whether Ghanaian presidents can serve a maximum of two terms, consecutive or non-consecutive

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has filed a suit at the Supreme Court seeking an interpretation of Ghana’s constitutional provisions on presidential term limits, particularly whether the two-term restriction applies to consecutive and non-consecutive terms.

The party wants the court to declare that a person cannot be elected President of Ghana more than twice or serve more than two four-year terms, regardless of whether the terms follow one another or are separated by a period out of office.

The action, filed against the Attorney-General, invokes Articles 58(2) and 66(1), (2) and (3)(a) of the 1992 Constitution. The writ and statement of case were filed by the party’s solicitor, Godfred Yeboah Dame of Dame & Partners.

The suit comes amid public debate over President John Dramani Mahama’s eligibility to contest the 2028 presidential election, having previously served as president in two separate periods.

The NPP is asking the Supreme Court to clarify whether the constitutional limit of two terms means a maximum of two terms in total, irrespective of whether another president occupies the office between them.

In its statement of case, the party argues that interpreting the restriction as applying only to consecutive terms could allow a former president to serve one term, leave office after failing to secure immediate re-election, and subsequently return to serve two additional terms.

The party contends that such an interpretation would effectively introduce the word “consecutive” into the Constitution, despite its absence from the relevant provisions.

It argues that allowing a president to accumulate more than two terms through non-consecutive periods in office would undermine the constitutional framework governing presidential tenure.

The NPP is also seeking clarification on the eligibility of a vice-president who assumes the presidency for more than half of a predecessor’s unexpired term. It wants the court to declare that such a person would be eligible to contest for only one additional presidential term.

In support of its arguments, the party has cited international examples, including the United States’ 22nd Amendment, which limits the number of times a person may be elected president. It has also referred to recommendations in Ghana’s Constitution Review Commission’s 2011 report concerning presidential term limits.

The case has attracted attention because of its potential implications for Ghana’s democratic system and the 2028 elections.

However, the filing of the suit does not itself determine President Mahama’s eligibility or establish that he intends to seek another term.

The Supreme Court’s eventual decision will clarify the interpretation and application of the relevant constitutional provisions, subject to the court’s determination of the case.