Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, Chairman of Ghana’s Constitutional Amendment Committee, has called for legal reforms to limit the president’s authority to make direct appointments, arguing that excessive executive discretion undermines governance quality.
In a social media post reacting to recent critiques of presidential appointments, including those by policy analyst Dr. Steve Manteaw, Prempeh emphasized the risks of diluted oversight when leaders wield unchecked hiring powers.
“When a president is vested with power to make too many appointments, quality control, including due diligence and oversight, both in the appointment phase and post-appointment performance monitoring, is bound to suffer,” Prempeh stated. He advocated for constitutional amendments to cap the number of direct presidential appointments and enforce merit-based criteria for key roles. “The ultimate solution is to limit the number of direct appointments a president can make, including by defining clear meritocratic criteria and qualifications,” he added.
The remarks follow public scrutiny of recent appointees perceived as lacking requisite expertise, with critics like Manteaw warning that such choices risk eroding public trust. Prempeh’s proposal aligns with broader debates over balancing executive authority with institutional accountability, particularly amid recurring allegations of partisan favoritism in state appointments.
Ghana’s current system grants the president wide latitude in appointing officials across ministries, commissions, and state agencies, a practice critics argue has occasionally prioritized loyalty over competence. Prempeh’s push for reform echoes longstanding concerns about politicization of institutions such as the judiciary and Electoral Commission, which have faced accusations of bias during contentious election cycles.
Constitutional experts note that restructuring appointment processes could strengthen institutional independence and restore public confidence. However, implementing such changes would require bipartisan support, a challenge in Ghana’s polarized political climate. The debate also touches on global governance trends, where democracies increasingly prioritize transparent, competency-based recruitment to curb executive overreach.
As Ghana prepares for future electoral contests, the call to redefine presidential powers underscores a growing emphasis on institutional integrity. Prempeh’s intervention highlights the tension between executive efficiency and democratic accountability, a balance critical to sustaining Ghana’s reputation as a stable democracy in West Africa.
