Vice Chair of Parliament’s Subsidiary Legislation Committee and a member of the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee, Nana Agyei Baffuor Awuah, has described the Constitution Review Committee’s (CRC) proposal to extend the presidential term from four to five years as unnecessary.

He made the comments on Newsfile on JoyNews on Saturday, December 27.

His remarks follow the submission of the CRC’s final report to President John Dramani Mahama on Monday, December 22.

The report contains several key recommendations, including the separation of the legislature from the executive, a reaffirmation that the Constitution does not allow a third presidential term, and a proposal to extend the presidential term of office from four to five years.

The CRC has so far presented a summary of its findings to the President, with the full and final report expected to be made public in January.

Speaking on the programme, Mr Baffuor Awuah stressed the need for a thorough comparative analysis of the CRC’s proposals against earlier constitutional review efforts, particularly the report of the Professor Fiadjo Committee.

“When you look at the Fiadjo Commission’s report on the tenure of the president, they conducted a historical analysis of where the four years came from,” he explained.

“The Consultative Assembly initially preferred five years, the Commission of Experts recommended four, and the Powers of Government Committee opted for five. After careful evaluation, they settled on four years.”

He questioned the rationale behind the proposed extension, arguing that the justification for giving presidents more time to complete projects is largely impractical.

“The fundamental question is: what mischief are we seeking to cure with this proposed extension? The so-called ‘mischief’ is about giving the president time to finish his work, but practically, no president can complete everything during his tenure,” he said.

Mr Baffuor Awuah noted that presidents routinely initiate projects, contract loans, and pass legislation whose full impact often extends beyond their time in office.

Extending the term by just one year, he argued, would not change that reality.

“The issue really has to do with continuity. We should focus on passing laws or mechanisms that ensure continuity, rather than simply extending the president’s term,” he said.

“Adding one more year will not enable the president to finish everything he starts. We need to look at how best we can achieve continuity effectively.”