Private legal practitioner Ken Kuranchie says his decision to go to the Supreme Court over presidential term limits is aimed at resolving what he describes as an ambiguity in Ghana
The report indicates that private legal practitioner Ken Agyei Kuranchie says his decision to go to the Supreme Court over presidential term limits is aimed at resolving what he describes as an ambiguity in Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, rather than securing a third term for President John Mahama.
It further notes that speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on Monday, he explained that the case is seeking the court’s interpretation of whether a president who leaves office after serving one term can become eligible to serve another term.
“We are in the Supreme Court asking what we believe is one of the most important political cases in our democracy,” he said.
According to him, the case is based on his interpretation that the presidency is consecutive and that a person elected to the office can serve two terms, depending on how the Constitution is read.
“Whether the presidency is consecutive or not, if it is consecutive, then what it says clearly is that the person related to the office of president shall serve two terms, or shall serve for two terms,” he explained.
Mr Kuranchie stated the Supreme Court must consider the Constitution as a whole and not rely on a single provision.
“The 1992 Constitution is a document that is too generous. It is a big document, and it is to be read as a whole,” he said.
He argued that the Court must examine the background, history and other relevant provisions of the Constitution before reaching a conclusion.
“You are saying that read the 1992 Constitution as a look at the background, the history of the 1992 Constitution, read the Constitution as a whole, and then we may come to that conclusion,” he stated.
Mr Kuranchie rejected suggestions that the legal action is an attempt to secure a third term for President Mahama.
“I’ve heard arguments about a third term. We are not seeking a third term for President Mahama. That is not about what we are doing,” he said.
He explained that the issue before the court is about eligibility, insisting that the matter is about whether a person who has previously served as president can qualify to contest again.
“What we are doing is that we are saying that the presidency is consecutive. If you recall, around 2023, I took a similar route to the Supreme Court,” he added.
Mr Kuranchie stated his earlier case on the matter remains unresolved and is based on the same argument that a president elected to office is entitled to serve two terms.
