Legal practitioner and policy analyst, Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers has called on the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit filed by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) seeking an interpretation of Ghana’s constitutional provisions on presidential term limits.
Brako-Powers argues that the party’s legal action is premature because there is no existing constitutional dispute requiring the court’s intervention. He maintains that the case centres on a hypothetical future situation rather than a concrete legal controversy.
The NPP has asked the Supreme Court to clarify whether the constitutional limit of two presidential terms applies regardless of whether the terms are served consecutively or separated by a period out of office.
The party 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, and whether such a person may subsequently contest for only one presidential term.
Reacting to the suit on Thursday, October 29, 2026, Brako-Powers argued that Article 66(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution already provides sufficient clarity on presidential tenure and the two-term restriction.
He cited previous court decisions, including Republic v Special Tribunal; Ex parte Akosah and Agyei-Twum v Attorney-General; Ex parte Dr Zenator, to support his position on the circumstances in which constitutional interpretation becomes necessary.
The legal practitioner further argued that questions about Ghana’s presidential term limits should be resolved through the wording and structure of the country’s own Constitution rather than rules drawn from different constitutional systems.
He warned that allowing courts to consider hypothetical electoral disputes before a relevant action or decision has occurred could encourage political parties to seek premature judicial rulings on future candidacies.
