President John Dramani Mahama has bluntly rejected calls for a third presidential term, insisting that his position is clear and will not change.
According to John Mahama, the Supreme Court case on Presidential term limits is not his business.
Mahama disclosed that he believes the constitutional provision governing presidential tenure is clear, following a legal action seeking the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the two-term limit for presidents.
Speaking during the Reset Tour and citizens’ engagement in the Volta Region on Friday, July 17, President Mahama stated, “Let me be very clear. The Constitution is not ambiguous. It is exactly what it says”.
“I have read Article 66 over and over. A president is limited to two terms. Full stop. Those who have gone to the Supreme Court are free to do so. That is their right. But my position is clear, and it will not change.”
He added, “I know that people have gone to the Supreme Court seeking interpretation of the clause that governs the tenure of the president. If you ask my personal opinion, I thought that it was clear enough. I’ve read it over several times; it’s exactly what it says, but if they want to ask the Supreme Court, that is their business”.
“The people of Ghana gave me a mandate for one term. And I am working hard to meet the promises I made them,” he said.
Mahama added that he has urged his ministers to work with urgency to ensure the government fulfils its commitments.
“I always tell my ministers, I say let’s number our days, so that we can work harder to meet the promises we made the Ghanaian people,” he said.
President Mahama added, “But I know that the people of Ghana gave me one additional term, and I’m going to work to meet the trust that they put in me”.
His comments come on the heels of Ken Kuranchie, a Ghanaian news editor and lawyer, filing a writ at the Supreme Court seeking interpretation of Ghana’s presidential term-limit.
Reports suggest the suit was filed on June 30, 2026, and was brought by Ken Kuranchie and Bridget Brita Buabeng of Besamho Legal Consult, Kasoa, representing him, with the Attorney-General, Dominic Ayine, named as the sole defendant.
The case refers to Article 66(2) of the 1992 Constitution, which limits a person to two terms as President of Ghana.
The suit is seeking an interpretation of Article 66(2) of the Constitution, arguing that the two-term presidential limit applies only after two consecutive elected four-year terms and that a break resets the eligibility count.
Ken Kuranchie is seeking three declarations from the court.
The first being that the two-term presidential limit in Article 66(2) only takes effect upon the completion of two consecutive terms of four years each.
“A declaration that, on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(2), 246(2), 1(1), 35(1), and 42 of the 1992 Constitution, the two-term presidential limit in Article 66(2) is properly construed as imposing a prohibition on election to the office of President of Ghana only upon the completion of two consecutive terms of four years each,” the writ stated.
The second a substantial break of one four-year electoral cycle resets the eligibility count.
“A declaration that, on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(2), 246(2), 1(1), 35(1), and 42 of the 1992 Constitution, a substantial break of one four-year electoral cycle of elected presidential service resets the eligibility count,” the writ added.
The third, that the prohibition in Article 66(2) is not engaged until a person has been elected to and has served two consecutive elected terms of four years each.
The writ added, “A declaration that, on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(2), 246(2), 1(1), 35(1), and 42 of the 1992 Constitution, the prohibition in Article 66(2) is not engaged until a person has been elected to and has served two consecutive elected terms of four years each”.
@ghnow_ “Education is better than Nkukuntinti” – Ghanaian woman says
♬ original sound – GHnow
@ghnow_ Prophet Eric Uche-Boahen has weighed in on the political undertones surrounding the 2026 FIFA World Cup final, claiming that recent international political developments could influence the outcome of the tournament. According to him, Israel’s Prime Minister’s reported declaration of support for Argentina, coupled with comments attributed to former U.S. President Donald Trump against Spain, may pose spiritual and political challenges for the Spanish side.
♬ original sound – GHnow
