The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) in Ghana has rejected the proposal to extend the tenure of the President and Members of Parliament from four years to five years. According to the IEA, the existing constitutional mandate provides adequate time for an elected government to formulate and implement its programme. Former Chief Justice and IEA Fellow, Justice Sophia Akuffo, stated that there must be cogent and compelling evidence that the current four-year tenure is inadequate before such a fundamental alteration to Ghana's constitutional order is contemplated.
The IEA's rejection of the five-year tenure proposal is part of its engagement with the ongoing constitutional review process in Ghana. The Institute has formally rejected the proposal among a broader set of constitutional recommendations on which it has taken positions. The Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh-led Constitution Review Committee recommended that the constitutional terms of office for the President and Members of Parliament should be increased from four years to five years. However, the IEA has maintained that the difficulty of delivering government programmes cannot, by itself, justify extending the tenure of elected officials.
Justice Akuffo argued that political parties and prospective governments have considerable time to prepare their programmes before assuming office and should therefore be capable of commencing governance promptly once elected. She questioned delays in the appointment of ministers and other officials responsible for implementing government policy, arguing that administrative delays should not be used as a basis for extending the constitutional mandate of elected governments. According to her, it shouldn't take six months to appoint ministers and people into key positions.
The IEA's position on the tenure debate places the issue within the broader context of governmental efficiency and democratic accountability. While proponents of a five-year mandate contend that an additional year could provide more time for governments to execute longer-term policies and assess their outcomes, the IEA has argued that the existing four-year period can accommodate meaningful policy implementation when governments are adequately prepared and institutions function effectively.
The Institute has also questioned whether policy discontinuity in Ghana can properly be attributed to the four-year electoral cycle. Instead, it has argued that weaknesses in institutions, inadequate planning, and the tendency of successive administrations to abandon or redesign programmes initiated by previous governments may be more significant causes of interrupted national development. The IEA has consequently linked the tenure debate to the question of national development planning.
The IEA supports strengthening the National Development Planning Commission and establishing a credible long-term national development framework capable of providing continuity across successive administrations. According to the IEA, a binding national development framework could allow different governments to pursue substantial programmes within the existing four-year mandate while ensuring that national development does not repeatedly begin from a new starting point whenever political power changes hands.
The Institute's broader constitutional position extends beyond the proposed duration of presidential and parliamentary mandates. It has called for measures to reduce the President's appointment powers, strengthen Parliament and the Judiciary, improve local democracy, enhance accountability, and establish greater continuity in national development planning. The IEA has also expressed reservations about the proposed timetable for constitutional amendments, urging that the reform process should not be rushed.
Key points
- The IEA rejects the proposal to extend presidential and parliamentary terms from four to five years.
- The Institute argues that the existing four-year tenure is sufficient for governments to formulate and implement their programmes.
- The IEA advocates for strengthening institutions, planning mechanisms, and administrative processes to enable governments to deliver within the existing constitutional period.
