Two Presidential terms, consecutive or not? NPP seeks Supreme Court interpretation

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has taken the debate over presidential term limits to the Supreme Court, seeking a definitive interpretation of whether Ghana's Constitution permits a person who has already served two separate terms as President to contest for the office again.

The party wants the apex court to declare that the constitutional limit of two presidential terms applies regardless of whether the terms are served consecutively or separated by a period out of office.

The action, filed through former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame of Dame & Partners, names the Attorney-General as the defendant.

According to the writ of summons and statement of case dated July 28, 2026, the NPP is seeking an interpretation of Articles 58(2) and 66(1), (2) and (3)(a) of the 1992 Constitution.

The suit comes amid public debate over whether a former President who returns to office after losing an election could qualify to serve additional terms.

NPP wants two-term limit clarified

At the centre of the case is Article 66(2) of the Constitution, which provides that a person shall not be elected to hold office as President of Ghana for more than two terms.

The NPP argues that the provision places an absolute limit on the number of terms a person may serve as President, irrespective of whether there is a break between those terms.

The party is consequently asking the Supreme Court to affirm that no individual can be elected President more than twice or serve more than two elected four-year terms, amounting to eight years.

It further wants the court to declare that a former President who has completed one term can serve only one additional term, even if the individual leaves office before subsequently winning another presidential election.

According to the NPP, interpreting the provision as applying only to consecutive terms could create an opportunity for a President who loses re-election to return to office and claim eligibility for two fresh terms.

The party maintains that such an interpretation would defeat the purpose of the constitutional restriction on presidential tenure.

Party warns against rewriting the Constitution

In its statement of case, the NPP challenges arguments suggesting that a break in presidential service resets the constitutional term limit.

It contends that the Constitution makes no distinction between consecutive and non-consecutive presidential terms.

The party argues that introducing such a distinction through judicial interpretation would amount to adding words to the Constitution without following the prescribed constitutional amendment process.

It further maintains that the disputed interpretation could create uncertainty over presidential tenure and undermine the constitutional framework governing the transfer and exercise of executive power.

Questions over Vice-Presidents who assume office

The NPP is also asking the court to clarify how presidential term limits should apply to a Vice-President who assumes the presidency following the departure of a sitting President.

In particular, it seeks a declaration that a Vice-President who serves more than half of a predecessor's unexpired presidential term should qualify to contest a presidential election for only one further term.

The party wants the court's interpretation to settle how such periods of service should be counted when determining eligibility for future presidential elections.

NPP relies on international constitutional examples

In support of its position, the party refers to constitutional arrangements in other jurisdictions, including the United States, where the 22nd Amendment places restrictions on the number of times a person may be elected President.

The NPP also cites constitutional developments in some African countries, arguing that disputes over presidential term limits have, in certain circumstances, contributed to political uncertainty.

It additionally relies on the 2011 report of Ghana's Constitution Review Commission, which recommended clarifying the constitutional restriction on re-election after two presidential terms.

The party is therefore asking the Supreme Court to settle the meaning and application of Ghana's presidential term-limit provisions.

The filing of the suit does not itself determine the constitutional question. The matter remains subject to the Supreme Court's interpretation and final determination.