Chairman of the Constitution Review Committee (CRC), Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, has cautioned that the government’s decision to present its own position on proposed constitutional reforms has complicated an already sensitive review process.
Speaking on JoyNews’ PM Express on Monday, Prof Prempeh said constitutions are designed to outlast governments and political parties, making it imperative for political leaders to approach the exercise with patriotism rather than partisan interests.
He stressed that constitutional reform should not be treated like ordinary politics because it shapes the country’s governance framework for generations.
“Constitutions are different; they are forward-looking. They last at least a generation.”
According to Prof Prempeh, constitutions establish the rules governing leadership selection, the transfer of power, the distribution of authority and the overall functioning of the state, requiring political actors to look beyond their immediate interests.
He warned that if the review process is driven by party political considerations rather than the national interest, Ghana could miss a rare opportunity to implement transformative reforms.
“If you see it as just another way for one incumbent party to get their preferences vis-à-vis the rival party, then I think we have lost an opportunity to do some real game-changing reforms.”
While acknowledging that politics will inevitably influence constitutional reform, Prof Prempeh insisted that broad public participation and extensive national debate must remain central to the process.
“This is why I think it’s important for the deliberative content of this process to be very high.”
He cautioned against rushing reforms simply to secure a referendum, arguing that citizens should have sufficient opportunity to hear competing viewpoints before constitutional changes are adopted.
Reflecting on the review timeline, Prof Prempeh said valuable time had already been lost. In hindsight, he noted that the process could have progressed more smoothly if the government had submitted its proposals through the same consultative process available to other stakeholders rather than presenting a separate official position.
According to him, that approach would have avoided months of delays since the end of January and allowed consultations to proceed without interruption.
Prof Prempeh acknowledged that the government may be seeking to align any constitutional referendum with the upcoming local government elections to improve voter turnout, given the traditionally low participation in standalone referendums. However, he maintained that meaningful public engagement should take precedence over speed.
He admitted that wider consultation could extend the timeline but argued that this is an essential feature of democratic constitution-making.
“That’s what makes constitutions and constitution-making and democracy slower than the alternative. You slow it so that you hopefully improve the outcome, the legitimacy of the outcome.”
Prof Prempeh further warned that the government’s separate position has introduced fresh uncertainty into the constitutional review process.
“It throws a little bit of a spanner in the works a bit.”
He questioned how competing official positions from different political parties would be assessed and incorporated if multiple parties also decide to submit their own proposals, warning that the development could complicate efforts to build broad national consensus on constitutional reform.
