Six-year presidency won’t solve Nigeria’s problems – CUPP

The Coalition of United Political Parties and the Nigerian Political Science Association have rejected the proposed six-year single term for the president and state governors, describing it as an unnecessary and ineffective solution to the country’s challenges.

The spokesperson for CUPP, Mark Adebayo, and the immediate past President of NPSA, Prof. Hassan Saliu, argued in separate interviews with Sunday PUNCH that extending the tenure of elected executives to a single six-year term would neither address the country’s security concerns nor solve pressing challenges in infrastructure, education, healthcare and economic development.

On Wednesday, the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, announced plans to sponsor a bill proposing a single six-year term for the president and governors, saying the reform would enable elected officials to concentrate on governance rather than re-election campaigns.

He said the proposed legislation would be among the first bills he intended to present in the Senate following the 2027 general elections.

Nigeria currently operates a two-term system that allows presidents and governors to serve two four-year terms.

Bamidele, however, maintained that the existing arrangement often pushes officeholders to begin planning for re-election midway through their first term, which he believes detracts from effective governance.

Commenting on the proposed legislation, the CUPP spokesperson warned that the proposal could fuel suspicions of a hidden agenda to elongate the tenure of the current or potential beneficiaries of the bill, recalling past controversies surrounding attempts to amend constitutional term limits.

He stated, “That statement could trigger suspicion of a third-term agenda or an elongated tenure. So, there will be suspicions. Number two is that it is unworkable for Nigeria to have a single-term presidency or governorship. In their first term, presidents and governors do much better than in their second term. So, if anybody wins the presidency or governorship and knows they are not coming back, they may just do anyhow, knowing they are not returning.

“Rather, what we should do is that the issue of one term or two terms should be tinkered with in a very creative manner. For instance, if I am elected a governor for a tenure of four years, after my four years, I shouldn’t have the right to contest immediately as a sitting governor or president. I should vacate office after four years. If I need to come back, I will campaign again four years later. But I will not have the capacity to use the machinery of state and the treasury of the state for campaigns. If you do that, a lot of our governors and presidents will do much better.

“If you are going to base it on the time factor, you can’t solve all the challenges of this country even if it is a 10-year term. And somebody else will come and tell you that we should increase it to a 20-year single term. So, it is unnecessary. It is uncalled for. It is undesirable. It is not the solution. It is not the solution to anything.”

On his part, the former NPSA President acknowledged that a six-year single term could reduce the cost of frequent elections and allow elected leaders to focus on governance without the distraction of re-election campaigns.

However, he cautioned that tenure length alone would not guarantee better leadership, stressing that political attitudes, accountability and value systems remain critical factors in delivering good governance and meeting the expectations of Nigerians.

Saliu stated, “It has merits and demerits. One of the merits is that it will reduce the huge resources committed to the four-year electoral cycle. If it is six years, that will be okay. Two, it may enhance governance efficiency, as a sitting governor will not be bothered about a second term. He will have the time to concentrate on a single tenure.

“On the side of the demerits, what about the attitude of political operators? We like changing laws in Nigeria, but most times we ignore the human factor. Our politicians are basically the same. Whether you give them six years, seven years or 10 years, will their attitude change? They will still continue as if the masses are not there, as if Nigeria was created for them alone. In other words, the accumulative tendency will continue whether it is six or seven years.”

The professor stressed that efforts should be directed at reforming the country’s political value system to promote good governance rather than focusing on the issue of tenure length.

“Another issue is that it will deny voters the opportunity to reward or renew the mandate of a performing governor or President. If it is six years, no matter what the governor may do, there will not be another chance for him. That will deny citizens the opportunity to periodically assess those they have elected and decide whether to renew their mandate or not.

“All said and done, we need to work on the value system. Most of the people in the country have a completely different agenda from what the masses expect them to do. In that case, one will ask: Does it really matter whether it is four years or six years? What is important is for people to accord recognition to and pursue interests that match what the people want them to pursue.”