The Trades Union Congress (TUC) has called for stronger governance reforms to accompany any extension of Ghana’s presidential term from four to five years.
The TUC said while a longer presidential term could provide more time for governments to formulate, implement and assess policies, it could also expose citizens to the consequences of misgovernance for a longer period.
Mr Joshua Ansah, Secretary-General of the TUC, made the call at a press conference in Accra on Wednesday to state the union’s position on the review of the 1992 Constitution, the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) recommendations and the Government’s position on them.
The TUC has taken note of the CRC’s recommendation to amend Article 66(1) to extend the presidential term from four to five years, as well as the Government’s acceptance of the recommendation.
Mr Ansah said the TUC’s acceptance of the recommendation would be conditional on broader reforms aimed at strengthening democratic governance and public confidence in state institutions.
“The acceptance of this recommendation, therefore, imposes an obligation to improve governance and bolster confidence in democratic governance,” he said.
He said the extension of the presidential term could not be considered in isolation from other constitutional reforms intended to improve governance.
“In other words, this recommendation is tied to other recommendations that are intended to strengthen and improve governance. One cannot, therefore, merely agree to tenure extension and leave everything else the same,” he said.
On presidential appointments, Mr Ansah said the TUC supported the proposal to amend Article 70 to limit the appointment powers of the President.
He, however, said the union, like the Government, considered the four classifications of public service appointments proposed by the CRC to be vague.
“The TUC will work with the Constitution Review Implementation Committee (CRIC) as it develops a more appropriate and practical classification system for limiting the appointment powers of the President,” he said.
Mr Ansah said amending Article 70 alone would not be sufficient to significantly restrict presidential appointment powers because the provision covered only a limited number of public institutions, particularly independent constitutional bodies.
He said insulating such institutions from partisan considerations in presidential appointments would strengthen their independence and enhance public confidence in their work.
Mr Ansah said the TUC supported the Government’s proposal to delete the requirement under Article 78(1) that the majority of Ministers of State be appointed from among Members of Parliament.
He said the union did not expect Ministers of State to simultaneously serve as Members of Parliament.
The TUC, however, disagreed with the CRC proposal to bar an MP who resigns from Parliament from being appointed as a Minister during the term of the Parliament to which the person was elected.
“We have no problem if Members of Parliament resign and take up ministerial appointments. Our problem is with Ministers of State doubling as Members of Parliament,” he said.
He argued that the existing arrangement had weakened parliamentary oversight, encouraged Executive dominance over legislation and undermined accountability.
On dual citizenship, the TUC strongly rejected the CRC recommendation to amend Article 94(2)(a) to allow dual citizens to contest parliamentary elections and serve as MPs while retaining their citizenship of another country.
Mr Ansah said the union also disagreed with the Government’s acceptance of the proposal and ongoing legislative efforts to allow dual citizens to occupy public offices, except the positions of President and Vice-President.
He described the proposal as unfair and contradictory to existing requirements for other citizens seeking elective office.
He cited the requirement for certain public servants, including teachers, to resign from their positions before contesting parliamentary elections, arguing that similar considerations should apply to dual citizens.
“The current arrangement must remain,” he said.
The TUC also supported the recommendation to amend Article 89(2) to create a 33-member Council of State and change its composition.
Mr Ansah said the Council of State remained a useful organ of state but required reforms to make it more effective and responsive to citizens’ expectations.
He said the dominance of presidential appointees on the Council was unhelpful, while the process for electing regional representatives had become increasingly affected by partisan politics.
On the election of District Chief Executives (DCEs), the TUC said it supported the Government’s position on the CRC recommendation but rejected a proposal for the incumbent government to nominate five candidates, from which three would be shortlisted for election.
Mr Ansah described the proposal as paternalistic because it would preserve central government influence over district administration.
“The TUC rejects this proposal. It is paternalistic, and it retains the central government’s dominance of the district administration,” he said.
He questioned whether such an arrangement would produce meaningful political change, arguing that successive governments could nominate their own party members or sympathisers.
On lands and natural resources, the TUC said it supported the broad recommendations of the CRC aimed at reforming the legal framework governing the management of the country’s land and natural resources.
Mr Ansah expressed concern that the Government had rejected recommendations in an area that had generated significant historical and contemporary concerns.
He said the Government had rejected about 54 per cent of the total recommendations made by the CRC.
According to him, the proposed referendum would consequently focus only on issues selected by the Government, excluding recommendations that other stakeholders may favour.
The TUC, therefore, called for a broader and more inclusive approach to the constitutional reform process to ensure that the final amendments strengthened governance, accountability and public confidence in Ghana’s democratic system.
