Tenure Elongation for President and Governors

Few years ago, former president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo embarked in a disastrous quest for a third term which would have extended his presidential tenure from 8 years to 12 years or more.  After 8 years in office, he started seeing himself as indispensable to Nigerian progress and peaceful co-existence.  He cobbled together various reasons to justify his position. One reason advanced by him was that God does not believe in failed projects, meaning that he needs more time to complete all the projects he started.  His unwise quest for tenure elongation as we all know turned out to be very catastrophic for his integrity and image at home and abroad. Foreign governments, especially western democratic governments and Nigerians who hailed him as a democrat when he was first elected turned against him.  Obasanjo, to-date  never recovered from his wrong-headed adventure.

Today, president Goodluck Jonathan is set to embark on another ill-conceived and ill-timed adventure.  This time he wants to change the constitution and increase president and governor’s tenure from 4-year to 6-year single term.  In current Nigerian political dispensation, presidents and governors can run for two consecutive 4-year term, but in his proposed plan, presidents and governors can only run for one single 6-year term.  President Jonathan said that 4-year tenure is too expensive for the country, that he will not benefit from the change in the tenure.  Remember, he was not suppose to run for president in the first place before God told him to save Nigeria by running for president.  He was suppose to complete late President Yar’Adua’s term and disappear into the night, but decided to change his mind and contest again.  He will probably change his mind again after the constitutional amendment, but that is beside the point.   It is true that 4-year term is too expensive, but 6-year single term may be far more expensive figuratively, by that, I mean the cumulative cost may be terrible for Nigeria.  Lets examine the potential pros and cons.

Pros:

(a)    6-year tenure will mean that election will be held every 6 years instead of  4 years which means less money will be spent on elections.

(b)   6- year single term may encourage some presidents or governors to take bold steps with regard to the economic, political or social policies they think will benefit the country in the short and long-run without fear of negative backlash when they seek re-election.

(c)    Zoning will be easier to implement across the six geo-political zones in a 6-year single term compared to what we have now.

Cons:

(a)    6-year single term will be more likely to consolidate the culture of impunity that already exist in Nigeria.  Politicians will be less responsive to the electorate if they do not have to worry about re-election.

(b)    Corruption is likely to increase because they will accumulate all they can without fear of immediate repercussion from the electorate.

(c)    6-year single term gives less incentive to successive presidents or governors to record achievements quickly so they can be rewarded with a second term.  This incentive is a critical part of 2-term tenure.  A President or governor will be more responsive to the electorate and less likely to govern like an emperor if they know they will face the electorate soon.   4-year or 5-year consecutive term creates inbuilt, self- perpetuating incentive of reward which in turn benefits the entire country. Typical example is the United states where 4 year two consecutive term have been in existence since post Franklin Roosevelt era.  It is not perfect, but it has worked so far.  .

(d)    What happens if the electorate mistakenly elects an incompetent leader, that means Nigerians will be saddled with that person for 6 years.  Six years of bad leadership is eternity, it will seem and feel like never ending nightmare.  Some leaders are so narcissistic to the point of believing that their policies are correct and should not be questioned and will continue pushing unpopular policies through duration of their tenure.    One may say that the Senate, House of Representative and House of Assembles are there to check and balance the executive power.  That may not always be the case as you can see from most state House of Assemblies and local government councils where real democracy with checks and balances are yet to manifest.

President Goodluck Jonathan proposal will not be good for Nigeria even-though he is now denying that he is the originator of 6-year, single term idea.  Why in the world is this president embarking in this ill-timed, ill-conceived proposal now when the country is wallowing in poverty and insecurity especially in the north.  We have seen over and over how know-it-all presidents, who claims to know what is best for the country when infact they are clueless.  President Jonathan is already turning into a disappointment.  He appears lost, clueless and oblivious of staggering poverty in the land he lords over.  Tenure elongation proposal is such a waste of people’s time.  This president need to back off and concentrate on governing.  Bad leadership fueled by monumental and persistent corruption remains the the bane of Nigeria and this president, unfortunately is about to ruin his reputation in ill-time and dangerous endeavor. What if another president decides to eliminate tenure altogether.  President Jonathan should leave Nigeria constitution alone and mind his business.  Nigerians are tired of this nonsense. Good governance, total war on corruption, security and economy should be his top priority.

The negative consequence of this proposal is enormous.  Nigerians will be better off shunning this proposal.  President Goodluck Jonathan may mean well, but good intention alone is not enough.  This type of proposal is especially bad for a developing country like Nigeria where democracy and rule of law is just taking root.  Mexico is practicing 6-year single term, and it does not seem to be working well. France have 7- year term but the president can run for re-election.  5-year two consecutive term for presidents and governors and 5-year continuous tenure for national and state legislatures will be a better idea since that will give them enough time to implement their programs and lessen money spent on election, but length of politician tenure should not be a priority for Nigeria at this time.  As I stated before, zoning should be done away with in Nigerian politics. Selection of leaders should be based on merit and capability not ethnicity, religion or geography.  A good leader ends up lifting up the entire country.  Conducting free and fair election, war on corruption, addressing insecurity and economy should be of utmost priority for Nigeria at this time.  Politician elected in a fair and free election is more likely to be responsive to the electorate which will take care of some of the  malaise bedevilling Nigeria.