4-year presidential term has restricted Ghana’s leadership – Alhassan Suhuyini backs 5-year proposal – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction

The debate over the optimal length of a presidential term is a critical conversation in any democracy, and in Ghana, this discussion has gained renewed urgency. Recent comments by Alhassan Suhuyini, the Member of Parliament for Tamale North and Deputy Minister for Roads and Highways, have highlighted perceived limitations in the current governance structure. He argues that the four-year presidential term may be hindering Ghana’s long-term development and leadership potential. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the proposal to extend the presidential term to five years, exploring the rationale, potential benefits, and the delicate balance between governance stability and democratic accountability. We will delve into the constitutional context, the arguments presented by proponents of the change, and the practical implications for Ghana’s future.

Key Points

Background

To understand the significance of this proposal, it is essential to examine the historical and constitutional context of Ghana’s presidential terms. The current system was established by the 1992 Constitution, which marked the return to multi-party democracy after a period of military rule. The four-year term was chosen to ensure frequent accountability to the electorate and to prevent the consolidation of power.

The 1992 Constitutional Framework

The 1992 Constitution of Ghana is the supreme law of the country. Article 66(1) states: “The President shall hold office for a term of four years beginning from the date on which he is sworn in as President.” This provision was designed to create a regular cycle of democratic renewal. However, over the past three decades, governance experts and politicians have debated whether this cycle is too short for the developmental context of a nation like Ghana.

The Constitutional Review Committee

The Constitutional Review Committee was established to examine the 1992 Constitution and propose amendments to strengthen Ghana’s democratic institutions. Chaired by a renowned academic and governance expert, Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, the committee’s mandate includes assessing the effectiveness of various constitutional provisions. The proposal to extend the presidential term is one of several recommendations aimed at improving governance stability and policy continuity in Ghana.

Analysis

Alhassan Suhuyini’s argument centers on the idea that the four-year term acts as a “limitation” rather than a “blessing.” This perspective provides a rich ground for analysis of how electoral cycles impact governance, particularly in developing economies with significant infrastructure and social deficits.

The Impact of Short Electoral Cycles on Governance

A four-year term creates a compressed timeline for a government to implement its agenda. The first year is often a “honeymoon period” for setting up and planning. The final year is typically dominated by electioneering, where major policy decisions are often deferred or tailored to appeal to voters in the short term. This leaves a window of approximately two years for substantive policy execution. For long-term projects—such as major infrastructure development, educational reform, or industrialization strategies—this timeline can be insufficient, leading to delays, discontinuity, or abandonment when a new administration takes over.

Policy Continuity and Long-Term Vision

Suhuyini’s statement that “visionary leadership may be undermined by the present electoral cycle” points to a critical challenge. Ambitious, transformative projects often require more than four years to yield results. A five-year term, while seemingly a modest extension, could provide an additional year of focused governance, potentially allowing for the completion of more complex initiatives. This could foster greater policy continuity, especially if successive governments from the same party seek to build upon existing frameworks rather than starting anew.

Balancing Stability with Democratic Accountability

While the arguments for a longer term focus on stability and effectiveness, the primary counter-argument is the risk to democratic accountability. A longer term means that citizens have to wait an extra year to pass judgment on their leaders through the ballot box. This could potentially reduce the frequency of public feedback and increase the risk of a government becoming detached from the electorate’s needs. The challenge for any constitutional amendment is to find a balance that offers enough time for effective governance without eroding the fundamental democratic principle that power is derived from the consent of the governed.

Practical Advice

For citizens, policymakers, and stakeholders in Ghana’s democracy, understanding the nuances of this proposal is crucial. Here are some practical considerations for engaging with this debate:

For Policymakers and Legislators

Legislators must approach this proposal with a focus on evidence. It is advisable to:

• Commission Studies: Conduct comparative analyses of other democracies (both in Africa and globally) that have different presidential term lengths to assess the correlation with development outcomes.
• Public Consultation: Engage in extensive nationwide dialogues to gauge public opinion on the matter. This ensures that any constitutional change has broad popular support.
• Consider Hybrid Models: Explore whether a five-year term should apply to both the President and Parliament to maintain synchronization in the electoral cycle.

For the Ghanaian Electorate

Citizens should stay informed and critically evaluate the arguments from all sides. When considering such a significant change, voters should ask:

• How would a five-year term specifically benefit my community and the nation’s development goals?
• What safeguards can be put in place to ensure that a longer term does not lead to a lack of accountability?
• Is the problem the length of the term, or is it related to other factors like campaign finance reform, strengthening independent institutions, or improving the policy-making process?

FAQ

Conclusion

The proposal to extend Ghana’s presidential term from four to five years, as supported by Alhassan Suhuyini, represents a significant potential shift in the country’s governance architecture. The core argument is that a longer term would provide the necessary breathing room for governments to pursue ambitious, long-term projects, thereby fostering policy continuity and national development. However, this proposal must be weighed against the fundamental democratic need for regular accountability. The debate highlights a central tension in governance: the desire for effective, stable leadership versus the imperative of democratic responsiveness. As the Constitutional Review Committee continues its work, a robust, informed public discourse will be essential to determine the best path forward for Ghana’s democracy.

Sources

• Original Report: “4-year presidential time period has restricted Ghana’s management – Alhassan Suhuyini backs 5-year proposal” – Life Pulse Daily (Published: 2025-12-23).
• Constitutional Framework: The 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, particularly Article 66 and Article 257.
• Official Body: Information on the mandate and composition of the Constitutional Review Committee of Ghana.
• Public Statements: Reports from Joy FM’s Super Morning Show featuring Alhassan Suhuyini.