MP Baffour Awuah Advocates for Presidential Continuity Framework, Not Term Extension

Introduction

The debate surrounding the duration of a president’s tenure is a critical aspect of democratic governance, particularly in emerging economies striving for stability and development. In Ghana, a significant contribution to this national discourse has been made by Member of Parliament (MP) for Manhyia South, Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah. Rather than simply supporting a straightforward extension of presidential term limits, he has proposed a more nuanced approach: establishing a legal framework that prioritizes the continuity of governance and policy execution. This perspective challenges the conventional narrative of term extension by focusing on the systemic issue of abandoned projects and uncompleted policy agendas. As the Constitutional Review Committee suggests moving from a four-year to a five-year term, MP Baffour Awuah’s argument introduces a vital dimension to the conversation: the need for legal mechanisms that ensure long-term national projects survive the transition between administrations.

Key Points

To understand the core of MP Baffour Awuah’s proposal, it is essential to break down the primary arguments he presented during his interview on News File on JoyNews. His stance is not merely about time, but about the structural integrity of governance.

Focus on Continuity Over Tenure Length

The central thesis of the MP’s argument is that the length of a presidential term is secondary to the mechanisms that ensure policy continuity. He argues that extending a term by one year (from four to five) does not fundamentally solve the problem of discontinuity. If the underlying legal framework remains unchanged, a president may still leave office with significant unfinished work. Therefore, the priority should be legislation that binds successive administrations to honor and complete critical national projects.

The Problem of Unfinished Projects

Baffour Awuah highlighted a chronic issue in Ghanaian politics: the abandonment of projects initiated by previous administrations. He noted that when a president leaves office, the “lifespan” of the projects they initiated often exceeds their tenure. Without a legal guarantee of continuity, these projects—whether infrastructure, educational reforms, or economic policies—are often left to languish. He posits that simply adding another year to a term does not automatically equate to the completion of these projects.

Economic Implications of Discontinuity

The MP introduced a financial perspective to his argument. He pointed out that presidents often secure loans to fund development initiatives. If a president leaves office before these loans are serviced or the projects funded by them are completed, the financial burden remains on the state without the corresponding economic benefit. He stated, “The president will take loans, he would not be able to finish paying the loans before he leaves office… he will pass laws, the laws will exceed his tenure.” This suggests that the lack of continuity results in a mismanagement of national resources and debt accumulation without development.

Background

The context of MP Baffour Awuah’s comments is the ongoing national conversation regarding the review of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. This conversation is being steered by the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC), a body tasked with evaluating the constitution to address contemporary governance challenges.

The Constitutional Review Committee’s Proposal

Chaired by Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh, the Constitutional Review Committee recently submitted its report to President John Dramani Mahama at the Jubilee House. Among the committee’s key recommendations is the proposal to extend the presidential term of office from four years to five years. The committee argues that a five-year term would provide enough time for governments to implement their development agendas effectively, thereby ensuring policy continuity. However, the specific details and the rationale behind this specific recommendation have not yet been fully disclosed to the public, leaving room for debate among stakeholders.

The Current Constitutional Framework

Under the current 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President is elected for a four-year term and is eligible for a second term, making a maximum of eight years in office. This system was designed to prevent the entrenchment of power and ensure regular democratic renewal. The debate now centers on whether this four-year cycle is sufficient for the execution of long-term national development plans, which often span decades.

Political Landscape

Ghana’s Fourth Republic has seen several presidents serve two terms, yet the issue of abandoned projects remains a talking point in political campaigns. The suggestion by the MP to introduce a legal framework for continuity is a response to this recurring political cycle. It reflects a growing desire among some political actors to depoliticize development and ensure that national interests supersede partisan political interests.

Analysis

MP Baffour Awuah’s intervention shifts the debate from a binary choice (four years vs. five years) to a complex discussion about governance architecture. His proposal warrants a deeper analysis of how legal frameworks can influence political behavior and national development.

Legal Frameworks vs. Political Will

The MP’s suggestion implies that the issue of project abandonment is not just a failure of political will but a failure of legal obligation. Introducing a “legal framework for continuity” would likely involve constitutional amendments or specific legislation that mandates the continuity of projects of “national importance.” Such a move would be revolutionary in Ghanaian politics, potentially allowing citizens or institutions to legally challenge a government that abandons critical projects. However, the challenge lies in defining what constitutes a “national project” and ensuring that such laws are not used to stifle the new government’s ability to reprioritize spending.

Critique of the “One-Year Extension” Logic

Baffour Awuah’s critique of the five-year proposal is logically sound regarding project timelines. Most major infrastructure projects (dams, hospitals, highways) take longer than four or five years to plan, execute, and complete. Therefore, whether a term is four or five years, it is rarely sufficient to see a project from conception to commissioning. This reinforces his argument that the mechanism for handing over and picking up projects is more important than the specific duration of the term. If a president knows that the legal system will compel the next administration to finish their projects, it may also encourage better planning and debt management.

Potential Legal Implications

Implementing a legal framework for continuity could have profound legal implications. It might require a redefinition of executive powers. Currently, the executive has the prerogative to prioritize government policy. Mandating continuity could be seen as infringing on the mandate of the incoming government, which is elected to implement its own manifesto. Therefore, any such legislation would need to carefully balance the need for policy stability with the democratic right of a new administration to govern according to their mandate.

Practical Advice

For stakeholders, including policymakers, civil society organizations, and the general public, engaging with the concept of presidential continuity requires a focus on tangible governance mechanisms. Here are practical steps and considerations regarding this discourse:

For Policymakers

Legislators should consider drafting specific bills that address the “Project Lifespan” issue. This could include establishing an independent infrastructure authority that operates with a degree of autonomy from the executive, ensuring that long-term projects are managed professionally rather than politically. Furthermore, any debate on term extension should be accompanied by a white paper on continuity mechanisms.

For Civil Society

Civil society organizations should demand transparency regarding the Constitutional Review Committee’s full report. It is vital to understand the complete rationale behind the five-year term proposal before endorsing or rejecting it. Advocacy groups should also push for the publication of data on abandoned projects in Ghana to quantify the economic cost of discontinuity.

For the Electorate

Voters should listen to the debates and ask candidates not just about their new plans, but about their strategies for maintaining and completing existing infrastructure. Understanding the MP’s argument helps voters evaluate whether a candidate is focused on sustainable development or merely on starting new initiatives for political credit.

FAQ

Conclusion

MP Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah’s contribution to the constitutional review debate offers a critical perspective on governance in Ghana. By shifting the focus from “how long” a president serves to “how effectively” governance is transferred and sustained, he highlights a systemic flaw in the current political structure. His call for a legal framework to ensure continuity addresses the root causes of abandoned projects and wasted resources. While the Constitutional Review Committee suggests a five-year term to allow for more work to be done, Baffour Awuah suggests that without a legal obligation for continuity, no amount of extra time will solve the problem of unfinished business. Ultimately, his proposal advocates for a governance system where national development transcends individual political cycles, ensuring stability and progress for the nation.