A Moment Appearance, No Longer A Veto – Constitution Review Chair Makes Case For Council Of State Reform

Introduction

In the complex landscape of Ghanaian politics, the debate over the relevance and efficacy of the Council of State has reached a fever pitch. Critics often label it as a redundant body or a mere extension of the executive arm of government. However, Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh, the Chairman of the Constitution Review Committee, has offered a robust defense of the institution. He argues not for its abolition, but for a strategic constitutional reform that redefines its role. Rather than granting the Council a “veto” power—which could paralyze governance—Prempeh envisions a body that offers a “moment appearance” or a critical second look at national decisions. This article explores the Chairman’s detailed case for preserving and reforming the Council of State to serve as a stabilizing force in Ghana’s highly polarized political environment.

Key Points

Background

The Council of State is a body established under Article 89 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. Its primary mandate is to advise the President on major policy matters. Historically, the composition includes former Presidents of the Republic, the Chief Justice, the Speaker of Parliament, the Chairman of the National Peace Council, the President of the National House of Chiefs, and fifteen other members appointed by the President.

The Controversy

Over the years, the Council has faced intense scrutiny. Public perception often characterizes it as a “rubber stamp” for the executive. This sentiment stems from the fact that the President appoints a significant portion of the membership, leading to accusations of cronyism. Consequently, there have been widespread calls from civil society organizations and political analysts to abolish the Council entirely, viewing it as an unnecessary drain on the public purse and a relic of the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) era.

The Constitutional Innovation

Prof. Prempeh highlights that the Council is not merely a colonial import or a military hangover. He describes it as a “constitutional innovation” modeled after Ghana’s traditional governance systems. By drawing inspiration from the traditional Council of Elders, the framers of the Constitution intended to create a repository of wisdom that stands above the daily fray of partisan politics. The current debate centers on whether this traditional ideal has been realized or if the institution has failed its mandate.

Analysis

Prof. Prempeh’s intervention shifts the discourse from “destruction” to “reconstruction.” His analysis suggests that the problems facing the Council are not structural failures of the concept, but implementation failures that can be remedied through legislative amendment.

The Case Against Abolition

Prempeh argues that in a democracy, institutions matter. To discard the Council of State simply because it is currently unpopular is shortsighted. He notes, “It would be sad that the only thing we’re going to throw away is the one institution that we think looks authentically Ghanaian.” His argument rests on the premise that indigenous governance structures possess inherent value that Western-style parliamentary systems alone cannot replicate. Abolishing it would mean discarding a potential mechanism for consensus-building.

Addressing the “Veto” Misconception

A critical distinction in Prempeh’s proposal is the difference between a veto and a second look.

• Veto: This implies the power to kill a decision made by the President or Parliament unilaterally. Prempeh explicitly states, “They can’t veto.”
• Second Look (Moment Appearance): This implies a mandatory review period. For high-stakes decisions like international agreements (e.g., lithium mining deals) or major appointments, the Council must review the matter. While they may not have the final say in a deadlock, their input ensures that due diligence is performed and the public record reflects their concerns.

This distinction is vital for maintaining the balance of power. It prevents the Council from becoming a “second parliamentary chamber” that gridlocks governance, while still utilizing its capacity for reflective oversight.

Reforming Composition and Transparency

The core of the criticism lies in the Council’s lack of diversity and independence. Prempeh acknowledges that the current structure often brings in “the same people from the same party.” The proposed reforms aim to dilute presidential dominance by:

1. Broadening the Pool: Mandating that appointments draw from specific sectors (e.g., Trades Union, Ghana Association of Industries, Chamber of Commerce, Academy of Arts and Sciences).
2. Including Traditional Authorities: Ensuring the National Chief Farmer and other traditional leaders have a seat.
3. Enforcing Transparency: Moving away from the “secrecy” that currently shrouds the Council’s meetings and recommendations.

By diversifying the source of appointments, the Council becomes a microcosm of society rather than a political echo chamber.

The Binding Nature of Advice

Prempeh clarifies that in specific domains, the Council’s advice will carry the force of law. Specifically, in recruitment processes for certain high-level positions, the advice will be binding. This is a significant shift. It moves the Council from a purely advisory role to a gatekeeper in specific administrative functions, ensuring that meritocracy is preserved against political interference.

Practical Advice

For citizens, policymakers, and stakeholders interested in the ongoing Constitutional Review Process, here are practical steps and considerations regarding the proposed Council of State reform:

1. Engage in Public Debates

The Constitution Review Committee relies on public evidence. Citizens should actively participate in town hall meetings and submit feedback regarding the composition of the Council. The goal is to ensure that the “diversified membership” includes genuine representatives of civil society, not just proxies for political parties.

2. Monitor the “Second Look” Mechanism

When the reforms are enacted, pay close attention to the specific bills and agreements subjected to the Council’s review. Citizens should advocate for the lithium agreements and other natural resource contracts to be part of this mandatory review list. This ensures that resource wealth is managed with inter-generational equity in mind.

3. Demand Transparency Standards

While the reforms propose transparency, the implementation is key. Civil society organizations should push for the publication of Council recommendations (where legally permissible) to ensure accountability. If the Council advises against a presidential appointment, the public has a right to know the rationale to prevent “rubber-stamping” in reverse.

4. Understand the Limits of Power

It is important for the public to understand that the Council is not a parliament. Expecting it to block bad government policies entirely is setting it up for failure. Instead, the practical advice is to view the Council as a “quality assurance” body. Its value lies in improving the quality of decisions, not in obstructing the government.

FAQ

Conclusion

The debate over the Council of State is a litmus test for Ghana’s democratic maturity. Prof. Henry Kwasi Prempeh’s defense of the institution offers a nuanced path forward: neither blind retention nor hasty abolition, but thoughtful, aggressive reform. By stripping away the potential for a “veto” and replacing it with a transparent, binding “second look” mechanism, the proposal seeks to modernize a traditional concept. If successful, this reform could transform the Council from a controversial political appendage into a respected stabilizing force, capable of balancing the scales in a polarized political environment. The ultimate goal is a Ghanaian governance model that is both modern and authentically rooted in the nation’s heritage.