Nothing Wrong if Supreme Court Interprets Constitution to Allow Mahama Third Term – Blay

Former National Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Freddie Blay, has stated that there would be nothing wrong if the Supreme Court of Ghana interprets the Constitution to permit former President John Dramani Mahama to contest for a third presidential term.

Speaking in a recent media interview, Mr. Blay emphasized that constitutional interpretation is within the exclusive remit of the Supreme Court, and any legal decision from the apex court, including one that permits Mahama to run again, should be respected.

“There’s absolutely nothing wrong if the Supreme Court rules that Mahama can contest again. The Constitution is a living document and it is the role of the Court to interpret it when there is ambiguity,” Blay said.

His comments come amid renewed public debate over Mahama’s eligibility to seek another term in office. Mahama, who served as President from 2012 to 2017 after previously completing the term of the late President John Atta Mills, is currently the presidential candidate for the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the 2024 elections.

Critics argue that allowing Mahama to run again could undermine the spirit of the two-term limit enshrined in the 1992 Constitution. However, proponents argue that Mahama has only served one full term and should be eligible for a second.

Blay urged political actors and the public to avoid inflaming tensions over the issue, stressing the importance of relying on legal processes rather than political rhetoric.

“We may have our preferences, but ultimately, we must respect the rule of law and the authority of our judicial institutions. If the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution in a particular way, whether we agree or not, we must accept it,” he stated.

When asked whether the NPP would challenge such a ruling if it were to favor Mahama, Blay was measured in his response, stating that parties have the right to seek clarification through the courts but must abide by the final decision once rendered.

His remarks have drawn mixed reactions, with some praising his commitment to constitutionalism and others criticizing what they see as tacit endorsement of a potential third-term bid.

As Ghana gears up for another critical election, the issue of term limits, judicial interpretation, and democratic continuity is once again in the spotlight. For now, all eyes remain on the Supreme Court, should the matter be formally brought before it.