Some Ghanaians Support President Mahama Third Term Despite Constitutional Concerns

Some Ghanaians have expressed support for President John Mahama serving a third term despite constitutional concerns, as the Supreme Court considers a suit seeking an interpretation of Article 66(2) of the 1992 Constitution.

The case, filed by two Ghanaian citizens, asks the apex court to clarify whether a president who has served two non-consecutive terms is eligible to contest for office again. The plaintiffs argue that the constitutional provision requires judicial interpretation because it does not explicitly address non-consecutive presidential terms.

Article 66(2) of the Constitution states that “a person shall not be elected to hold office as President of Ghana for more than two terms".

The legal action has sparked public debate over whether the provision imposes an absolute two-term limit or only applies to consecutive terms.

President Mahama has, however, dismissed suggestions that he intends to seek another term. Speaking on the ongoing legal action, the president said his mandate was limited to one term and that he had no intention of pursuing a third-term agenda.

“I’ve only one-term mandate,” the president said, urging supporters to focus on helping his administration deliver on its promises rather than discussing another presidential bid.

Despite his position, opinions among some Ghanaians remain divided.

Some people who spoke to 3Music TV at Circle in Accra said they would support a third-term bid if the Supreme Court rules that President Mahama is constitutionally eligible.

One man said Mahama’s previous terms were not consecutive and that, based on his performance in office, he would accept another candidacy.

Another respondent said the country is governed by laws and that if the Constitution contains an amendable provision or the court determines that Mahama is eligible, he would accept the decision.

“If there is an amendable clause in the constitution that makes him eligible, then I will accept it. But there will be serious problems if they try to use underhand means to get him a third term,” he said.

Others based their support on what they described as improvements under the current administration.

One man said he supported a third term because the government was making public institutions work and holding people accused of misusing state resources accountable.

Another said he believed there had been improvements in the livelihoods of many young people and that he was "100 per cent" in support of another term.

A separate respondent also backed the idea of a third term but said he wanted the government to stop what he described as the continuous arrest of citizens without justification.

But not everyone shared that view. One man said he would be disappointed if President Mahama sought another term, arguing that doing so would undermine Ghana’s democracy.

“The constitution is clear on the number of terms, and it does not matter whether they are consecutive or not. Any attempt to push him for a third term will be an affront to our democracy,” he said.

A woman, however, argued that Mahama deserved another opportunity because of his performance in office, saying the Supreme Court should allow him to contest if it finds him eligible.

The Supreme Court is yet to determine the constitutional question, while President Mahama has maintained that he is not interested in seeking another term.

The outcome of the case is expected to clarify the scope of Ghana’s presidential term limits and could shape future constitutional interpretation on the issue.