Private legal practitioner Ken Kuranchie has dismissed claims that his case before the Supreme Court is intended to pave the way for President John Dramani Mahama to seek a third term in office, insisting that the action is solely about constitutional interpretation.
Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on Monday, Mr Kuranchie said the case seeks judicial clarity on whether Ghana’s Constitution should be interpreted to allow a former president who served only one term to contest for office again.
According to him, the issue before the Supreme Court centres on the meaning of consecutive presidential terms and how the eligibility provisions of the 1992 Constitution should be applied.
He argued that the Constitution should be interpreted as a whole rather than relying on a single provision, explaining that his legal challenge draws on several constitutional articles to support his position.
Mr Kuranchie maintained that his writ does not mention President Mahama and should not be viewed as an attempt to secure another presidential bid for the current Head of State.
Instead, he said the objective is to obtain a definitive constitutional interpretation on whether a president who leaves office after serving one term becomes eligible to contest again.
He explained that, in his view, the Constitution permits a person elected as president to serve two consecutive terms, and that eligibility should be reassessed if that individual leaves office after completing only one term.
Mr Kuranchie noted that he had previously filed a similar case at the Supreme Court in 2023, adding that the matter remains unresolved.
While acknowledging that the court’s eventual interpretation could have implications for President Mahama’s future political prospects, he insisted that such an outcome would merely be a consequence of the ruling and not the purpose of the legal action.
He stressed that the case is intended to settle what he described as one of the most significant constitutional questions affecting Ghana’s democratic governance.
