In December 2025, the Constitution Review Committee (CRC) constituted by President John Dramani Mahama released its report after months of extensive consultations and stakeholder engagements.
Some of the proposals in the document sparked widespread debate, including the recommendation to extend the presidential term limit from four to five years.
Eight months after the report was released, it was only on Thursday, July 30, 2026 that Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Dr. Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, presented the Government’s position on the Committee’s recommendations at a press briefing in Accra.
At this presser, he indicated the Government’s adoption of the proposal to increase the presidential tenure.
Usually, policies or systems are adopted by others because they have yielded results elsewhere, informing the decision to imitate. Whether this model has delivered stability, growth, or good governance in the jurisdictions cited by the CRC, we are yet to know.
I believe it is crucial to examine the rationale and potential outcomes of this proposal, considering whether it addresses Ghana’s specific challenges or we simply have to adopt it because our neighbours are doing it.
I am tempted to believe the issue became a matter of concern for the CRC to consider because of some claims that were made by the opposition NPP at the time.
“A person shall not be elected to hold office as President of Ghana for more than two terms,” says Article 66(2) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution. Although this provision is clear without any ambiguity, the opposition NPP had been saying that President Mahama had intentions of running for a third-term despite the latter clearly rejecting the assertion on several occasions.
These allegations arose because of the peculiar nature of John Mahama’s tenure as president; having served a first term and returning after eight years. This is making some people suggest he could go for a third-term since his two terms weren’t consecutive.
But even as people debated, the CRC was expected to do its job. It had been mandated to find gaps in past constitutional reforms and recommend amendments to improve governance.
The CRC’s proposal – Article 66 of the 1992 Constitution
The Committee, chaired by Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh, conducted nationwide consultations, engaging with citizens, civil society groups, and traditional authorities across ten out of the 16 regions to proffer better amendments for the over three-decades-old constitution which many believe has outlived its usefulness.
Thankfully, when the CRC presented its report, the proposal on the term limits was unambiguous. The report stated as follows:
“Term of Office of President: Total Number of Terms – 1.1. The Committee proposes no amendment to Article 66(2), as we find no ambiguity regarding its meaning and no need to extend the two-term limitation on the number of terms a person may be elected to hold office as President.”
Case closed. No need to worry over a third-term ambition. But right beneath what appears to be the proposal that seems to put the lingering debate to rest, was another that sparked concerns. The CRC has proposed extending the presidential term limit from four to five years, aiming to give governments more time to govern effectively.
According to the team, the four-year term is insufficient for meaningful governance, saying a significant portion of the term is lost to administrative transition and electioneering. In the report, the Committee recommended as follows:
“Term of Office of President: Length of a Term – 1.2. The Committee recommends an amendment to Article 66(1) to extend the length of a President’s term from four years to five years.”
Public opinion; The differing voices
The proposal drew public reaction, similar to other key recommendations that could shape Ghana’s constitutional governance if approved.
When I first heard of that proposal in the report, I asked myself one question; “what can a government do in that additional year that it wouldn’t be able to do within the four years?” Thankfully, many people agree with me and have since been sharing the same sentiments I shared on the proposal. I’ll like to share just two of the opinions.
A Statesman and founding member of the NPP, Dr. Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe, issued a statement on the Committee’s report on Saturday, December 27, 2025, and expressed his disagreement with the recommendation, saying four years is enough for every Government to do whatever it wants to. He feared a bad Government will only extend its inefficiency and exploit state resources at the detriment of the citizenry.
“On the matter of presidential tenure, I state without hesitation that there must be no extension of the current term limits. The existing arrangement of two four-year terms is sufficient and must remain unchanged. Four years is adequate time for a serious and prepared government to make its mark. Governance is a continuum, and any responsible political party must be ready to govern from the first day in office. Arguments suggesting a need for additional time only create unnecessary opportunities for inefficiency and corruption,” he stated.
Dr. Nyaho-Tamakloe added that government is a continuum and whoever takes over after four years should complete projects commenced by his predecessor. “I also wish to emphasize that unfinished national projects must be continued by successive governments. The practice of abandoning ongoing projects in order to initiate new ones has become a major source of waste and corruption. While continuity may not necessarily be entrenched as a constitutional provision, it must become a binding principle of responsible governance.”
A legal practitioner and social activist, Martin Luther Kpebu, shared a similar sentiment on the proposal on The KeyPoints on TV3 on Saturday, December 27, 2025. For him, “it is a non-starter.” He even described the proposal as a subtle way of introducing a third-term into the Constitution. “What they have done is to introduce a third-term through the back door.”
He cited the Prof. Fiadjoe Committee report which he said sought opinions of the public on a five-year tenure which was eventually rejected. “In the case of the Fiadjoe Committee, Ghanaians were consulted through Short Messaging System (SMS) and we rejected the five years tenure,” he stated, adding that every good presidential material ought to know the team he would work with prior to wining an election, and should not wait to use a year or more to constitute an administration as part of the reasons being cited for the tenure extension. “Why would you wait till you become president before you decide who you work with? Start planning when you are campaigning.”
When Dr. Ayine presented Government’s position and said the five-year term has been accepted, he cited inadequate time for administrations to form their governments and wasting the final-year to prepare for elections as its reasons. Dr. Nyaho-Tamakloe and lawyer Martin Kpebu have flawed this reasoning of the Government as described above.
What Ghanaians said about the proposal – Global InfoAnalytics survey
Just when I thought my side could be winning the battle on this proposal, then came the bomb. Mussa Dankwah’s Global InfoAnalytics said the survey they conducted on the proposal had a lot of Ghanaians rooting for the five years. Their poll says majority of Ghanaians are backing the proposal of extending the presidential term limit to five years. According to the report, 57% of voters surveyed said they support the idea, while 36% stood opposed, with 7% saying they are undecided.
The CRC’s reason for the proposal and what the statistics say
Meanwhile, the CRC’s motive for the proposal is different from the explanation the Government provided as its reason for the adoption.
When Prof. Prempeh was interviewed by Keminni Amanor on TV3’s Hot Issues on Sunday, December 28, 2025, he explained that they proposed the five-year tenure because that is what is being practiced in the whole of West Africa, with the exception of Ghana and Nigeria which are running a four-year term of two-term limits.
Was the CRC’s reasoning influenced by data?
It appears the CRC sought to introduce the practice here without considering how the countries in question have fared with their democracy and development as a whole. How stable have these countries practicing the five years been with their governance? How is their Human Development Index, GDP and other indices?
One major conversation that dominated the debates when the proposal came out was how we’ll cope, should we have a very bad Government. And we shouldn’t forget that one of the major problems that have bedeviled countries in the subregion after gaining independence is political instability.
Therefore, I decided to look at how stable each of the countries in the subregion have been, with the term of their Presidents in perspective, since 1992 –when Ghana’s Fourth and last Republic began.
Geographically, there are 16 countries in the West Africa sub-region. However, Senegal and Cabo Verde are the only countries without real coup attempts since 1992. Out of these countries, Ghana and Nigeria are currently the only nations with a four-year, two-term presidential tenure.
West African countries with successful and attempted coups since 1992, including their presidential term limits:
Successful coups:
– Burkina Faso: 5-year term, two-term limit; coups in 2014, January 2022, and September 2022
– Guinea: 7-year term; coup in 2021 led by Mamady Doumbouya
– Guinea-Bissau: 5-year term; coup in November 2025
– Mali: 5-year term, two-term limit; coups in 2012, 2020, and 2021
– Mauritania: 5-year term, two-term limit; coups in 2005 and 2008
– Niger: 5-year term, two-term limit; coups in 1996, 1999, 2010, and 2023
– Ivory Coast: 5-year term, two-term limit; coup in 1999
Attempted coups:
– The Gambia: 5-year term; attempted coup in 2022
– Ghana: 4-year term, two-term limit; attempted coup in 2021
– Benin: 5-year term limit until 2025 when it extended it to 7 years; attempted coup in 2025
– Nigeria: 4-year term, two-term limit; attempted coups in 1997, 2004
– Liberia: 6-year term, two-term limit; attempted coup in the early 2000s
Countries without recent coup attempts (since 1992) and their presidential term limits:
– Cabo Verde: 5-year term, two-term limit
– Senegal: 5-year term, two-term limit
Generally, in terms of improvement in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth and Human Development Index (HDI), Cabo Verde has been leading the pack, with Ghana, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Nigeria, and Benin following suit.
So, what really did the CRC learn from these countries they’re taking a cue from, that’s making them opt for a five-year presidential term for Ghana? Is it the coups or the development?
Conclusion
The CRC’s proposal to extend Ghana’s presidential term limit to five years, citing the need for presidents to have more time to perform better, to some of us, is unconscionable. If the inspiration is that other West African countries are doing it, it’s worth noting that most of these very countries are plagued by political instability, coups, and underdevelopment.
In fact, of all the countries being considered, only Cabo Verde appears to be doing better than Ghana. Adopting a five-year term limit therefore, shouldn’t be the way to go. Ghana already has a relatively stable democracy and a growing economy. So, why fix a system which is not broken?
Rather than introducing changes that may disrupt this progress, we should focus on addressing the specific challenges facing us and build on our strengths.
We know Ghana is can be better than where we are. But if the governance and development of those we want to imitate are what inspired this proposal, I’ll plead with the CRC and the Government to rewrite their scripts on this proposal.
The writer, Felix Anim-Appau, works with the online unit at Media General. The views expressed in this piece are his personal opinions and do not reflect, in any form or shape, those of the Media General Group, where he works. His email address is [email protected], and he can be found on X as @platofintegrity
PLATO’S FOLDER: Why President Mahama must not be the new Akufo-Addo
