Jonathan and the single term agenda
Jonathan
Banji Aluko examines the proposal and the scenario it could create. When the 7th National Assembly is constituted tomorrow, one aspect of the Nigerian Constitution that may be considered for amendment by the Assembly is the tenure of elected officers in
the country. This is not unexpected following the clamour by President Goodluck Jonathan that a four year tenure was too short for elected political office holders.
He, however, added that he would not benefit from the change in the tenure. If the President sends the bill to the National Assembly as he promised, the bill will be up for amendment.
This is actually not the first time mention would be made for this important aspect of the constitution to be amended. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo had during his second term in office added his support to the proposal. Also former Commonwealth Secretary General, Emeka Anyaoku also recently advocated for the amendment. While many believe that the call by Obasanjo lacked national interest as it was aimed at extending his tenure, that of Anyaoku cannot be considered such.
Anyaoku, on his own, explained his position, saying such arrangement had already proven successful in Mexico and that since no nation—big or small—could evade the forces of globalization in managing its domestic and foreign policies, Nigeria should give it a trial.
The two are part of the growing number of Nigerians who are saying that elected political office holders should be given a single term of five or six years to rule. President Jonathan had argued that a single term of four years is too small for elected office holders to make appreciable impact. It also appears that consideration for prompt and efficient delivery of democracy dividends and the need to avoid the distractions of a second term campaign informed the recommendation.
Those who have argued in favour of the proposal also said that political office holders barely do anything in office in the later part of their administration because at that point, the only important task for them is usually geared towards securing another mandate to their offices or another one. They also posited that huge amount of state resources are devoted for election by politicians seeking second term in office.
According to Hon. Kanmi Olusanya, the move if well executed will reduce corruption and tension in the polity. He says, ‘I think this is a good idea, because it will ensure that the elected officials will not need to worry about planning for re-election in four years. It will allow them to focus on doing the wishes of those who elected them into office. More importantly, they will not need to placate ‘kingmakers’ who may not support them for a second term.
He however added that the proposal could make the political office holders lame duck from the very start. ‘That means that they will be free to do what they want without fear of losing the next election.
Of course that could also make it easier for them to not care what the people want and we’d be stuck with a bad president or governor for eternity!’
These can be said to be true considering the uproar that was generated before the conduct of the general election in April. In many states of the federation, organs of government were almost paralyzed as a result of the infighting within the ruling parties even as governors, senators and members of the House of Representatives were active participants. These are part of what proponents of the single term agenda are saying would be eliminated if it is passed into law.
Despite the clamour for the amendment, only few Nigerians are convinced that the plan is ideal for the country. For Fred Agbaje, a Lagos based constitutional lawyer, the suggestion by President Jonathan for a single six-year term for president will not work. He believes that the American system from where Nigeria copied the presidential system is working, and as such Nigerians should make it work for them.
“The idea of two terms of four years each is that you begin to build up in your first four years, and then if the people are satisfied with your work, they will bring you back to finish the work you have started.”
Also speaking with Sunday Tribune on the move, Chief Emeka Ngige, SAN, said the issue should not even arise at all. According to him, ‘the issue was discussed during the previous constitutional conference in 1978 and during the Abacha tenure. It was also discussed during the Abdulsalam tenure when a committee was constituted to discuss an amendment to the 1979 Constitution. The issue was well discussed and they came back with provision of two year term of four years so that it will create oppourtunity for someone who has performed creditably well to be voted into office again and someone who has not done well to be voted out of office.
‘When you give a politician a single tenure of five or six years, he is going there to steal since he is aware that he will not be re-elected again. I am not in support of it and that suggestion should not even come up at all.
Another person, Sylvanus Offor, who spoke with Sunday Tribune said President Goodluck Jonathan’s proposal will not be good for Nigeria. ‘The negative consequence of this proposal is enormous.
Nigerians will be better off shunning this proposal. President Goodluck Jonathan means well, but good intentions are not enough. This type of proposal is especially bad for a developing country like Nigeria where democracy and strong laws are just taking root.’
One of the reasons why many feel the proposal may not be good for Nigeria is that there is the potential while in office that politicians will lose touch with the people and principles which got them elected in the first place. The fear is that representatives who spend too many years in office, living in the national capital far from their constituents and surrounded by lobbyists and party managers, easily become part of a professional governing class, remote from the concerns of normal people.
Tribune
the country. This is not unexpected following the clamour by President Goodluck Jonathan that a four year tenure was too short for elected political office holders.
He, however, added that he would not benefit from the change in the tenure. If the President sends the bill to the National Assembly as he promised, the bill will be up for amendment.
This is actually not the first time mention would be made for this important aspect of the constitution to be amended. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo had during his second term in office added his support to the proposal. Also former Commonwealth Secretary General, Emeka Anyaoku also recently advocated for the amendment. While many believe that the call by Obasanjo lacked national interest as it was aimed at extending his tenure, that of Anyaoku cannot be considered such.
Anyaoku, on his own, explained his position, saying such arrangement had already proven successful in Mexico and that since no nation—big or small—could evade the forces of globalization in managing its domestic and foreign policies, Nigeria should give it a trial.
The two are part of the growing number of Nigerians who are saying that elected political office holders should be given a single term of five or six years to rule. President Jonathan had argued that a single term of four years is too small for elected office holders to make appreciable impact. It also appears that consideration for prompt and efficient delivery of democracy dividends and the need to avoid the distractions of a second term campaign informed the recommendation.
Those who have argued in favour of the proposal also said that political office holders barely do anything in office in the later part of their administration because at that point, the only important task for them is usually geared towards securing another mandate to their offices or another one. They also posited that huge amount of state resources are devoted for election by politicians seeking second term in office.
According to Hon. Kanmi Olusanya, the move if well executed will reduce corruption and tension in the polity. He says, ‘I think this is a good idea, because it will ensure that the elected officials will not need to worry about planning for re-election in four years. It will allow them to focus on doing the wishes of those who elected them into office. More importantly, they will not need to placate ‘kingmakers’ who may not support them for a second term.
He however added that the proposal could make the political office holders lame duck from the very start. ‘That means that they will be free to do what they want without fear of losing the next election.
Of course that could also make it easier for them to not care what the people want and we’d be stuck with a bad president or governor for eternity!’
These can be said to be true considering the uproar that was generated before the conduct of the general election in April. In many states of the federation, organs of government were almost paralyzed as a result of the infighting within the ruling parties even as governors, senators and members of the House of Representatives were active participants. These are part of what proponents of the single term agenda are saying would be eliminated if it is passed into law.
Despite the clamour for the amendment, only few Nigerians are convinced that the plan is ideal for the country. For Fred Agbaje, a Lagos based constitutional lawyer, the suggestion by President Jonathan for a single six-year term for president will not work. He believes that the American system from where Nigeria copied the presidential system is working, and as such Nigerians should make it work for them.
“The idea of two terms of four years each is that you begin to build up in your first four years, and then if the people are satisfied with your work, they will bring you back to finish the work you have started.”
Also speaking with Sunday Tribune on the move, Chief Emeka Ngige, SAN, said the issue should not even arise at all. According to him, ‘the issue was discussed during the previous constitutional conference in 1978 and during the Abacha tenure. It was also discussed during the Abdulsalam tenure when a committee was constituted to discuss an amendment to the 1979 Constitution. The issue was well discussed and they came back with provision of two year term of four years so that it will create oppourtunity for someone who has performed creditably well to be voted into office again and someone who has not done well to be voted out of office.
‘When you give a politician a single tenure of five or six years, he is going there to steal since he is aware that he will not be re-elected again. I am not in support of it and that suggestion should not even come up at all.
Another person, Sylvanus Offor, who spoke with Sunday Tribune said President Goodluck Jonathan’s proposal will not be good for Nigeria. ‘The negative consequence of this proposal is enormous.
Nigerians will be better off shunning this proposal. President Goodluck Jonathan means well, but good intentions are not enough. This type of proposal is especially bad for a developing country like Nigeria where democracy and strong laws are just taking root.’
One of the reasons why many feel the proposal may not be good for Nigeria is that there is the potential while in office that politicians will lose touch with the people and principles which got them elected in the first place. The fear is that representatives who spend too many years in office, living in the national capital far from their constituents and surrounded by lobbyists and party managers, easily become part of a professional governing class, remote from the concerns of normal people.
Tribune
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com