<<Print>>

In a couple of days, the Supreme Court will rule on the matter of the constitutionality of the Constitution Review Commission (CRC) between Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, the Plaintiff, and Attorney-General, the Defendant. In January 2010, President John Dramani Mahama set up a 10-member CRC under the Constitution Review Commission of Inquiry Instrument, 2010, C.I. 64 with the following terms of reference: (a) To ascertain from the people of Ghana, their views on the operation of the 1992 Fourth Republican Constitution and, in particular, the strengths and weaknesses of the Constitution; (b) To articulate the concerns of the people of Ghana on amendments that may be required for a comprehensive review of the 1992 Constitution; and (c) To make recommendations to the Government for consideration and provide a draft Bill for possible amendments to the 1992 Constitution. In June 2012, the president issued a white paper on the CRC�s report. In the said white paper, the president claimed to have accepted most, but not all, of the CRC�s recommendations. In October 2012, the president appointed a five-member Constitution Review Implementation Committee (CRIC) to undertake the preparatory steps, including drafting the appropriate bills, necessary to implement those CRC�s recommendations that the president had accepted. But, according to Professor Asare, the power to amend the constitution rests with Parliament and not the president. He supports this argument by quoting Article 289(1) to buttress his claim. Today has published in pages the arguments for and against on the constitutionality of the CRC.