Legal practitioner Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers has called for the dismissal of the New Patriotic Party's (NPP) writ seeking the Supreme Court's interpretation of presidential term limits. He argues that the action is premature and unnecessary, as there is no live constitutional dispute requiring the court's intervention. Brako-Powers made these comments on Thursday, October 29, 2026.
Brako-Powers cited several court cases, including Bilson v Attorney-General and New Patriotic Party v National Democratic Congress and Others, to support his argument that a mere intention or future possibility may not constitute an actionable constitutional wrong. He believes the NPP's action seeks a judicial pronouncement on a hypothetical future situation rather than an existing legal controversy.
According to Brako-Powers, Article 66(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution clearly outlines presidential tenure and the two-term limit, leaving no ambiguity that requires the court's interpretation. He referenced Republic v Special Tribunal; Ex parte Akosah and Agyei-Twum v Attorney-General; Ex parte Dr Zenator to support his argument on when constitutional interpretation is necessary.
The NPP's writ concerns Article 66(2) of the 1992 Constitution, which prohibits a person from being elected President for more than two terms. The party is seeking declarations on how the term limit should apply, including where presidential terms are interrupted. This includes scenarios where a Vice-President assumes the presidency and later seeks election.
Brako-Powers questioned the basis for importing the United States' approach to presidential succession into Ghanaian constitutional law. He noted that Ghana's Constitution does not contain a similar formula to the Twenty-Second Amendment to the US Constitution, which addresses the counting of certain periods served after succession.
Brako-Powers warned that entertaining premature claims about prospective candidacies could encourage political parties to seek judicial pronouncements on hypothetical electoral disputes before any relevant act or decision has occurred. He urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the NPP's writ as premature and unnecessary.
The NPP's action has sparked debate on the need for the Supreme Court to clarify presidential term limits. The court's decision will have implications for Ghana's electoral landscape. Brako-Powers' comments have contributed to the discussion, emphasizing the importance of justiciability and constitutional interpretation in the country's legal framework.
Key points
- The NPP's writ seeks interpretation on presidential term limits, particularly in cases of interrupted terms.
- Brako-Powers argues that the action is premature and unnecessary, citing established court cases.
- The Supreme Court's decision will have implications for Ghana's electoral landscape.
