New Patriotic Party (NPP) spokesperson for Gender and Social Protection, Akosua Manu, has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit seeking an interpretation of President John Dramani Mahama’s eligibility to contest for the presidency again after serving two separate terms, arguing that the Constitution is clear and unambiguous on the two-term limit for presidents.
Speaking on Channel One TV’s The Big Issue on Saturday, July 11, Akosua Manu argued that Article 66 of the 1992 Constitution clearly limits a person to two terms as President and cautioned the apex court against adopting an interpretation that could create uncertainty over presidential tenure.
She appealed to the judges hearing the matter to consider the long-term implications of their decision, stressing that constitutional interpretation should be guided by the broader national interest rather than the circumstances of any particular political figure.
“To the judges, I am telling you, think about the long term. You might think that whatever is being presented to you may make sense, but consider the long-term implications. Let us be true to ourselves and uphold the Constitution. To the judges, please throw that petition away,” she appealed.
Akosua Manu further contended that accepting the interpretation advanced by the plaintiff could create a precedent that would allow a former President to return to office after serving two terms simply because those terms were not consecutive.
Her comments follow the filing of a writ at the Supreme Court by Ganiwu Alhassan, a teacher from Kpandai in the Northern Region, seeking a declaration that a person who has served two non-consecutive terms as President remains eligible to contest the presidency again.
The suit, filed against the Attorney-General, argues that Article 66(2) of the Constitution only prohibits a person from serving more than two consecutive terms as President and does not bar someone who has served two separate, non-consecutive terms from seeking re-election. The plaintiff is asking the Supreme Court to declare that preventing such a person from contesting the presidency would be inconsistent with the Constitution.
