Some leading figures in the ruling New Patriotic Party claim President Akufo-Addo has already signed Dr. Dampare’s dismissal letter, which will be made public soon. Additionally, some reports suggest the IGP has been asked to proceed on leave, pending his imminent removal.

However, the Ghana Police Service has refuted these claims.

With the 2024 general elections approaching, the stakes are high regarding the IGP’s potential removal and allegations that the NPP wants Dr. Dampare out.

Regardless of the rumours’ validity, can the president remove Dr. Dampare? What could be the grounds for his removal?

What the 1992 Constitution says about the appointment and removal of IGPs:

Article 202 of the 1992 Constitution touches on the appointment of the IGP by the president in consultation with the Council of State. The Article, among other things, states that the president does not only have the power to appoint the IGP but also has the power to limit his powers.

Here are the exact words of the article:

(1) The Inspector-General of Police shall be appointed by the President acting in consultation with the Council of State.

(2) The Inspector-General of Police shall be head of the Police Service and shall, subject to the provisions of this article and to the control and direction of the Police Council, be responsible for the operational control and the administration of the Police Service.

(3) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the power to appoint persons to hold or to act in an office in the Police Service shall vest in the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Police Council.

Article 195 of the Constitution also touches on the appointment of the IGP with the police service being a public service.

The article states that:

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the power to appoint persons to hold or to act in an office in the public services shall vest in the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the governing council of the service concerned given in consultation with the Public Services Commission.

(2) The President may, subject to such conditions as he may think fit, delegate some of his functions under this article by directions in writing to the governing council concerned or to a committee of the council or to any member of that governing council or to any public officer.

(3) The power to appoint persons to hold or act in an office in a body of higher education, research or professional training, shall vest in the council or other governing body of that institution or body.

(4) The President may, subject to such conditions as he thinks fit, delegate some of his functions under this article by directions in writing to the Police Council or to a committee, or to a member, of the Council.

This more or less confirms the power of the president to appoint the IGP stated in Article 202.

Now, what does the Constitution say about the removal of an IGP?

Article 202, which touches on the appointment of the IGP, does not expressly mention how they can be removed. The article that touches on how an IGP can be ousted from office is Article 199, which states why any public servant can be removed.

The article states that public officers like the IGP can only be removed from office upon reaching their retirement age:

(1) A public officer shall, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, retire from the public service on attaining the age of sixty years.

(2) A public officer may, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, retire from the public service at any time after attaining the age of forty-five years.

(3) The pension payable to any person shall be exempt from tax.

(4) Notwithstanding clause (1) of this article, a public officer who has retired from the public service after attaining the age of sixty years may, where the exigencies of the service require, be engaged for a limited period of not more than two years at a time but not exceeding five years in all and upon such other terms and conditions as the appointing authority shall determine.

Article 191 of the Constitution, which touches on the protection of public officers, states that a member of the public service shall not be:

(a) victimized or discriminated against for having discharged his duties faithfully in accordance with this Constitution; or

(b) dismissed or removed from office or reduced in rank or otherwise punished without just cause.

Also, although the Constitution grants the president discretionary power in Article 296, the powers are limited.

Article 296 states that:

Where in this Constitution or in any other law discretionary power is vested in any person or authority—

(a) that discretionary power shall be deemed to imply a duty to be fair and candid;

(b) the exercise of the discretionary power shall not be arbitrary, capricious or biased either by resentment, prejudice or personal dislike and shall be in accordance with due process of law;
and

(c) where the person or authority is not a judge or other judicial officer, there shall be published by constitutional instrument or statutory instrument, regulations that are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution or that other law to govern the exercise of the discretionary power.

Precedent:

Despite the articles of the 1992 Constitution pointing to the fact that the president cannot remove IGPs, Akufo-Addo has in the past ‘removed’ one.

On July 22, 2019, the president ordered the then IGP, David Asante-Apeatu, to proceed on leave. His deputy, Commissioner of Police (COP) James Oppong-Boanuh, was asked to act as IGP until a substantive appointment was made. In August 2021, COP James Oppong-Boanuh was asked to also proceed on leave to make way for the new acting IGP who was later confirmed as the current IGP George Akuffo Dampare.

Prof Kwesi Aning, the Director of Academic Affairs and Research at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC), and IMANI Centre for Policy and Education, a Civil Society Organisation, have sued the state regarding President Akufo-Addo’s power to fire the heads of Ghana’s internal security agencies including the Chief Fire Officer of the Fire Service, IGP, the Director-General of Prisons Service, and the Comptroller General of the Immigration Service.

The plaintiffs are seeking that the Supreme Court would interpret the sections of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana that border on the appointment of the heads of the security agencies including Articles 200, 202(1), 202(2), 202(3), 205, 207 (1), 207(2), 207(3), 190(1), 191, 196, 199, and 296 of the constitution.