NPP’s suit on presidential term limits needless – Inusah Fuseini

Former Member of Parliament for Tamale Central, Inusah Fuseini says the NPP does not need to ask the Supreme Court to interpret the constitutional provisions on presidential term limits, because the 1992 Constitution is already clear.

Mr Fuseini, a lawyer, told Channel One TV that Article 66(2) limits a person to two terms as President. He said it makes no distinction between consecutive and non-consecutive terms, so a court interpretation is unnecessary.

In his view, the provision is aimed at limiting how many times a person can be elected, not at regulating how long someone must stay out of office before running again.

“I think that the emphasis should actually be put on election, not the person,” he said.

He compared the presidency with Parliament, noting that the Constitution caps presidential terms but sets no limit on how often an MP can seek re-election, adding that he has served more than four terms as a legislator because of that.

Mr Fuseini pointed to Article 66(1), which sets a presidential term at four years, and Article 66(2), which says a person “shall not be elected to hold office as President of Ghana for more than two terms.”

“The Constitution is very clear. The drafters were very clear. They knew what they wanted. They wanted to impose term limits,” he noted.

He also questioned involving the Supreme Court at all.

“The Supreme Court has no speculative jurisdiction. It can’t speculate what anybody will do,” he said.

Mr Fuseini further raised concern about spending public resources on a case built on a hypothetical situation, and said there must be a real constitutional issue for the court to decide.

The NPP has sued the Attorney-General, asking the Supreme Court to interpret Articles 58(2) and 66(1), (2) and (3)(a).

The party wants the court to affirm that nobody can be elected President more than twice or hold the office for more than eight years, whether the terms run back to back or are separated by time out of office.