The Independent Parliamentarians Advocacy Group Ghana (IPAGG), has strongly opposed the recent recommendation by the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) to extend the presidential term of office.
In a statement issued on the matter, IPAGG warned that the proposed extension could have far-reaching negative consequences for Ghana’s constitutional democracy and development agenda.
According to the group, extending the presidential term would amount to a regression rather than progress in the country’s democratic journey.
“While we respect the work of the Committee and acknowledge the importance of continuous constitutional dialogue, we must firmly express our opposition to this proposal,” the statement said.
IPAGG emphasized that Ghana’s four-year presidential term, coupled with a two-term limit, has been a cornerstone of democratic stability since the inception of the Fourth Republic.
“The current framework strikes a careful balance between granting elected leaders sufficient time to implement their policies and ensuring regular accountability to the electorate. Extending the term to five years risks weakening this balance by reducing the frequency with which citizens can exercise their democratic right to assess and either renew or withdraw their mandate,” the statement noted.
It will be recalled that in January 2025, the Mahama-led government established the Constitutional Review Committee to undertake a comprehensive review of the 1992 Constitution—the foundational legal framework of the Fourth Republic. The Committee was tasked to identify gaps, shortcomings, and ambiguities in the Constitution and propose practical and inclusive reforms that reflect the evolving aspirations of Ghanaians.
However, IPAGG questioned whether governance outcomes would significantly improve with an additional year in office.
“The suggestion that governance outcomes will improve with an extended presidential term raises a fundamental question: are the real challenges facing our democracy and development rooted in the length of the presidential term, or elsewhere?” the group queried.
The advocacy group argued that Ghana’s developmental challenges stem not from the duration of presidential tenure, but from issues such as corruption, policy discontinuity, weak institutional capacity, inadequate long-term national planning, and lack of discipline.
“These issues require structural and administrative reforms, stronger institutions, strict enforcement of existing laws, and bipartisan commitment to national development agendas—not an extension of executive tenure,” the statement stressed.
IPAGG further cited examples of established democracies such as the United States, Brazil, and Colombia, which operate under four-year presidential terms while maintaining strong democratic accountability that keeps leaders on their toes.
The group cautioned that any proposal by the CRC that fundamentally alters the democratic contract between the people and their leaders must be approached with utmost caution, broad public consultation, and compelling justification.
“At this time, we are not convinced that extending the presidential term serves the best interests of Ghana’s democracy or its citizens,” IPAGG stated.
The group therefore urged the Committee and policymakers to reconsider the proposal and instead focus on reforms that deepen accountability, strengthen democratic institutions, and safeguard the constitutional gains Ghana has made over the past three decades.
The statement was signed by Mr. John Yeboah, Convener of the Independent Parliamentarians Advocacy Group (IPAGG).
