[ad_1]
Prof Henry Kwasi Prempeh has defended the proposal to extend the presidential term to five years, describing it as a tougher test for incumbents rather than a gift to them.
Explaining the committee’s thinking on JoyNews, he said there was strong feedback from people who had worked closely with the Constitution.
“There was a sense that four years was not enough to put a government together and govern effectively,” he said.
However, Prof Prempeh noted that the committee also weighed public skepticism. “Some citizens say if four years is not enough, then the problem is inefficiency,” he acknowledged.
He said comparative evidence played a decisive role. “Globally, the norm in presidential systems has shifted from four to five years, especially in Africa,” he said, adding that Ghana is now among a shrinking group still operating a four-year cycle.
Importantly, he argued that a longer term could increase accountability.
“If you haven’t performed in five years, it becomes very difficult to persuade voters to give you more time,” he said. “In our logic, five years is actually tougher on the incumbent.”
Prof Prempeh also clarified that the proposal cannot affect the sitting president. “He was elected under a constitution that gives him four years. You cannot change a term midstream,” he stated.
[ad_2]
