Presidential Power Has Become a Heavy Burden, Says Prof Kwasi Prempeh

Professor Henry Kwasi Prempeh, a constitutional law expert and chair of Ghana’s Constitutional Review Committee, has argued that the excessive concentration of authority in the presidency has become more of a burden than a benefit to effective governance in the country.

Speaking in an interview on JoyNews, which was monitored by MyNewsGh, Prof Prempeh explained that one of the central objectives of the ongoing constitutional review process is to reduce the overwhelming responsibilities currently placed on the president, while rebuilding public confidence in state institutions.

According to him, Ghana’s system of governance has evolved into one where too much power, particularly appointment power, is vested in a single office. While this authority is often described as “powerful,” he stressed that it also comes with serious drawbacks that affect accountability, efficiency, and public trust.

“What people describe as power is also a burden,” Prof Prempeh noted, explaining that presidents are required to make hundreds of appointments across ministries, departments, agencies, boards, and commissions. This level of control, he argued, places unnecessary pressure on the presidency and fuels political patronage.

He clarified that the constitutional review committee is not advocating for a weak presidency. Instead, its aim is to redesign the system in a way that allows presidents to focus on policy direction and leadership, rather than micromanaging appointments that should be handled through independent and professional processes.

Using a sports analogy, Prof Prempeh questioned the fairness of allowing a politically interested actor to dominate key decision-making roles. 

“You shouldn’t allow the captain of one team to choose the referee,” he said, arguing that institutions requiring neutrality and independence must be insulated from political influence.

The professor also raised concerns about Ghana’s approach to fighting corruption, particularly the decision to vest prosecutorial authority in the Attorney-General, who is appointed by the president. 

He questioned the effectiveness of this arrangement, suggesting that decades of experience show it has failed to deliver the desired outcomes.

“If it was going to work, it would have worked by now,” he stated, pointing to persistent public skepticism around corruption prosecutions. 

According to him, even when action is taken, many citizens perceive such efforts as politically motivated, undermining confidence in the justice system.

Prof Prempeh emphasized that perception plays a crucial role in governance. 

“Once public trust is lost, even the right decisions are not believed,” he said. 

He argued that credibility is just as important as action, and that institutions must be structured to command public confidence.

In that context, he defended proposals to establish an independent anti-corruption commission, separate from political control. 

He explained that such models already exist in other jurisdictions and have been adopted precisely because politically controlled prosecution systems have failed to inspire trust.

“This idea is not new,” he said. 

“Some countries have accepted that corruption prosecution cannot succeed when it is handled by politically appointed officials.”

According to Prof Prempeh, the proposed reforms are evidence-based and informed by comparative constitutional practices, rather than political considerations. 

The goal, he said, is to build durable institutions that function effectively regardless of which party is in power.

Ultimately, Prof Prempeh said the constitutional review process is about redefining power, not removing it. By stripping away duties that have become counterproductive, the presidency can be strengthened rather than weakened.

“We are giving the president the right kind of power and taking away what has become a burden,” he concluded, adding that a more balanced system would benefit not only future presidents but Ghana’s democracy as a whole.