NewzChairman of the 2025 Constitution Review Committee, Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, has said the government should have formally communicated its position on constitutional reforms to the committee to help shape and guide its work from the outset. Speaking on JoyNews’ PM Express on Monday, August 3, Prof Prempeh said such a move would have provided valuable context for the committee as it embarked on its mandate to review the 1992 Constitution and conduct nationwide consultations.
According to him, the government’s input would not have undermined the committee’s independence but would have clarified its expectations and priorities regarding the reform process. “That would have saved us the wait period because we’ve waited quite a bit from the end of January to now… we’ve lost quite a bit of time.” Prof Prempeh explained that receiving the government’s position alongside submissions from other stakeholders would have enabled the committee to begin its work earlier and avoid delays. His remarks formed part of a broader discussion on the progress of the constitutional review exercise, during which he emphasised the importance of keeping the process free from partisan interests.
He urged political leaders to approach the review with a sense of patriotism, stressing that the Constitution is designed to serve future generations rather than the interests of any particular government or political party. Prof Prempeh also cautioned against rushing constitutional amendments, arguing that extensive public consultation and deliberation are essential to producing legitimate and enduring reforms. Chairman of the Constitution Review Committee, Prof H.
Kwasi Prempeh, has defended calls for broader public deliberation on Ghana’s constitutional review process, insisting that while it may slow the timetable, democracy and constitution-making are not designed to be fast. Speaking on JoyNews’ PM Express on Monday, Prof Prempeh said the country must resist the temptation to rush reforms that will shape Ghana’s governance for generations. He stressed that constitutions are fundamentally different from ordinary politics because they are designed to outlive governments, political parties and individual leaders.
“Constitutions are different; they are forward-looking. They set the foundational rules of the game for how the country is to be governed, how we recruit our national political leadership, how we exit them, how we distribute power, and these things transcend party governments.” Prof Prempeh said he hopes the political class, which he described as the gatekeepers of the review process, will approach the exercise with patriotism rather than partisan interests. “They will come to this with a certain sense of patriotic obligation, not deference to party, because this is going to last beyond any party’s tenure, any president’s tenure.” He urged political leaders to think beyond their time in office and consider the kind of country future generations would inherit.
“If you see it as just a zero-sum game of 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 cannot be separated entirely from the constitutional review process, Prof Prempeh argued that extensive debate and public participation are essential to producing legitimate reforms. “Rather than rush things and go quickly to cast a vote, let us debate and argue it, and let the public be part of that debate, and let us see who has the superior arguments, because we are reforming our state, the republic, and how it’s governed.” He admitted that the review process has already lost valuable time. “I think we’ve lost time.” Looking back, he said he would have preferred the government’s position on constitutional reforms to have been submitted directly to the Constitution Review Committee alongside proposals from other stakeholder…
Summary from source