NPP's Ken Kuranchie wants John Mahama disqualified from contesting the 2024 elections

On February 1, 2024, a writ was filed at the Supreme Court against the Attorney-General, His Excellencies the former Presidents of the Republic of Ghana, J.A. Kufuor and John Dramani Mahama, and the Speaker of Parliament.

Kenneth Agyei Kuranchie is a ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) member. He unsuccessfully contested the last NPP parliamentary primaries in the Okaikoi North Constituency.

In his writ, Mr Kuranchie asserts that former President John Dramani Mahama is not entitled to contest the next presidential election as flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress. He argues that a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution is crucial.

According to him, a person seeking a second presidential term must be a sitting president, and the second presidential term must be consecutive to the first presidential term. This is the second time Ken Kuranchie has filed the case at the Supreme Court, emphasizing the importance of the Court's role in interpreting the Constitution, with the ultimate aim of preventing former President John Dramani Mahama from contesting the 2024 presidential elections. The first case was thrown out on November 14 2023, by the Supreme Court as procedurally incompetent.

Lawyers for former President John Daramani Mahama and the Speaker of Parliament, Tony Lithur and Thaddeus Sory, have already filed their responses to the case. However, the Attorney-General and His Excellency J.A. Kufuor have yet to file any responses.

The lawyers have argued that the case is of mere nuisance value because Ken Kuranchie has not raised any issues of constitutional interpretation that would properly invoke the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to interpret Articles 66(1) and (2) of the Constitution.

They argue that a cursory read of the said constitutional provisions will show that the words "sitting President" and "consecutive term" have not been mentioned. It is Ken Kuranchie who has imported those words in there. Quoting several decisions of the Supreme Court, they argue that the law is clear that a constitutional issue is not raised because of a plaintiff's absurd, strained and far-fetched understanding of clear provisions in the Constitution.

In this case, Ken Kuranchie's statement of case does not contain any submissions to demonstrate that the words of articles 66 (1) and (2) are imprecise, unclear, or ambiguous, or that some rival meanings have been placed on them or that there is any conflict on the face of those provisions as would require the Supreme Court to interpret them. The issue of constitutional interpretation perceived by Ken Kuranchie is a figment of his own imagination.

In a rather unusual twist of argument, Ken Kuranchie seems to have contradicted himself in his statement of the case when he argues that former President John Daramani Mahama could still contest the elections if he receives parliamentary approval under Article 68(2) of the order to be eligible to contest the presidential elections.

Information that a case like this has been pending in the Supreme Court may come as a complete surprise to Ghanaians who are already gearing up for the next presidential elections, with the two major parties having already chosen their flag bearers. A similar situation is happening in America right now, with former President Donald Trump seeking a second term in office. If there are any controversial issues regarding a second presidential term for Donald Trump, it certainly does not arise in the context of the question of whether he can only contest as a sitting president or whether his second term must be consecutive to the first.

There is also an interesting aspect to this case. The current Chief Justice and the bulk of the judges of the Supreme Court have been appointed by President Nana Akufo Addo, who would dearly love his protégé, Vice President Mahamadu Bawumia, to succeed him.

His biggest stumbling block is former President John Dramani Mahama. Because of the case's very political nature, observers are keenly watching to see what kind of panel the current Chief Justice will put in place to adjudicate on it.

Stay tuned.