Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, a Democracy and Development (D&D) Fellow in Public Law and Justice at CDD-Ghana, has criticised the practice of swearing in the Speaker of Parliament as Acting President whenever both the President and Vice President of Ghana travel outside the country.

He described the practice as a ‘constitutional folly’ and said it is not supported by the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.

According to a channel1news.com report, Prof Asare, in a strongly worded Facebook post titled ‘Grounding the Kotoka Clause’, argued that the ritual of transferring executive power to the Speaker during such instances stems from a misinterpretation of the 1992 Constitution by the Supreme Court in the case of Asare vs Attorney General.

He said the constitution makes a clear distinction between physical absence and actual inability to perform presidential duties.

He pointed to Article 60(8) of the constitution, which states that the Vice President shall act when the President is absent.

However, he emphasised that Article 60(11) only permits the Speaker of Parliament to act as President when both the President and Vice President are ‘unable to perform the functions’ of the presidency, not simply when they travel outside the country.

“There is no clause that says if the President and Vice President go to Togo, the Speaker gets to play President. That fiction was manufactured by judicial misinterpretation, not democratic mandate,” he indicated.

He laid the blame for the current practice on a 2003–2004 interpretation by then-Supreme Court Justice Date-Bah, describing the ruling as ‘retrogressive and legally risky’.

“This isn’t just bad interpretation, it’s risky governance. Allowing the Speaker to wield executive power during routine travel creates a dangerous political opportunity,” he stated.

MRA/AE

'Where did you get the dollars?' Watch as Opambour questions Sammy Gyamfi