Seeking a Third Presidential Term is Not Illegal or Illegitimate

Seeking a third term as president in Ghana is not illegal or illegitimate. This is a point that often gets lost in public debate, where the mere mention of a third term triggers fierce opposition and accusations of constitutional mischief.

Yet the Constitution of Ghana, like any living legal document, provides mechanisms for its own amendment. If the people of Ghana, acting through their elected representatives and ultimately through a national referendum, decide that a particular president should be granted the opportunity to serve another term, that decision carries legal weight and democratic legitimacy. The process is deliberately difficult, but difficulty is not the same as prohibition.

The foundation of this argument rests on Article 66 of the 1992 Constitution, which sets the limits on presidential terms. Because presidential term limits are an entrenched provision, they cannot be altered by a simple parliamentary majority or by the whim of any single leader.

The framers of the Constitution intentionally placed term limits in the category of entrenched clauses precisely because they recognised how fundamental they are to Ghana's democratic stability.

Entrenchment, however, does not mean permanence. It means that any change must follow a rigorous, multi-step legal procedure designed to ensure that the will of the people is genuinely reflected.

The first step requires that a bill to amend Article 66 be introduced in Parliament. This is not a casual undertaking. The proposal must be debated, scrutinised, and subjected to the full legislative process.

Because the provision is entrenched, the amendment requires broad parliamentary backing, typically a high majority threshold far beyond the ordinary simple majority needed for routine legislation.

This high bar ensures that no narrow faction or transient political advantage can drive constitutional change. Parliament must demonstrate that there is substantial consensus before the matter can move forward.

Even after Parliament approves the bill, the process is far from complete. Under Ghana's constitutional rules for amending entrenched provisions, any such change must be put to a national referendum.

This is where the real power resides, not in the hands of politicians but in the hands of the electorate. The referendum requirement is a safeguard of the highest order, ensuring that the decision ultimately belongs to the people of Ghana rather than to any parliament, president, or political party.

The threshold for success is deliberately demanding. For the referendum to pass, at least forty percent of registered voters must turn out to vote.

This turnout requirement prevents a small, motivated minority from imposing constitutional change on an indifferent majority. In addition, at least seventy-five percent of those voting must approve the amendment. This supermajority requirement reflects the gravity of altering the foundational rules of the Republic.

These thresholds are not easy to meet. They demand widespread public engagement, sustained national conversation, and genuine consensus across regional, ethnic, and political lines. That is exactly as it should be.

The difficulty of the process is not a flaw but a feature, designed to protect Ghana's democracy from hasty or self-serving constitutional tinkering. If a third-term amendment were to clear Parliament with the required majority and then pass a national referendum with forty percent turnout and seventy-five percent approval, it would represent an overwhelming expression of popular will.

Opponents may argue that any attempt to extend presidential tenure is inherently undemocratic. But this view confuses the difficulty of the process with its legitimacy.

A constitution that can never be amended, no matter how strong the popular will, would itself be undemocratic. The 1992 Constitution wisely balances stability with flexibility, protecting term limits while allowing the people, through rigorous procedure, to change them if they so choose. Seeking a third term is therefore neither illegal nor illegitimate; it is a constitutional possibility that ultimately rests with the people of Ghana.

Anthony Obeng Afrane