What is your take on the bill seeking a single six-year tenure for Nigerian presidents and governors?

There is a bill in the National Assembly seeking a single six-year tenure for Nigerian presidents and governors. Many consider the bill political, controversial and unnecessary. Some think otherwise. Yusuf Abuldkadir, Awau Adegoke, Ayomide Makinde and Elizabeth Innocent sampled the opinions of some Nigerians on this issue. Their views:

Mohammed Aliyu

It is good for Nigeria to have presidents and governors who would only spend six years and leave for another person to offer their experience. It would also create transparency in the electoral system. From previous elections, sitting presidents and governors always have supreme power over electoral activities — hence, making it an avenue to rig elections and retain power even if he or she is no longer the people’s choice.

Muhammad Muhammad

The bill proposing a single six-year tenure for Nigerian presidents and governors aims to promote stability, reduce political distractions, encourage long-term planning, and minimise incumbent abuse of power. This bill could help reduce the influence of money politics and limit the risks of re-election-focused governance. However, it may also limit opportunities for new leadership and ideas. The bill’s potential impacts on Nigeria’s democratic system and governance should be carefully considered, weighing the benefits of stability against the need for accountability and fresh perspectives. Its effects on the country’s political landscape would be significant.

Raji Amao

This bill is against our constitution. The constitution stipulates the years a president and governor can use per tenure, which is four years each (first and second term) making eight years. The bill is not the concern of Nigerians. They should drop it because it would cause havoc. They do not care what the result would be. The bill in question is an exercise in futility. It cannot invalidate the extant provision of the section of the constitution which provides a four-year term in office for presidents and governors. I urge the National Assembly to disregard the bill because it would erode the sanctuary of our law. And, the bill is based on selfish interest and purpose.

Wonderful Adegoke

A six-year term bill for Nigerian presidents and governors could foster stability and continuity in governance, enabling leaders to implement long-term plans. However, it harbours the risk of entrenching incumbents, ineptitude, reduced accountability, and potential abuse of power. Considering the potential consequences, this change could undermine Nigeria’s democratic progress and current constitutional framework. Extending the presidential and gubernatorial terms to six years would cause a significant alteration to the county’s political structure.

Ogunwole Oyelade

There is nothing bad about the bill. If any government spent six years in office, it would have performed any magic it wanted to perform within that period. So, in six years, any serious Nigerian would know if the politician deserves their vote again. If this bill is passed, it would be a good idea. However, I would urge Nigerians to vote for people who have the fear of God in them, and not Émílókàn politicians. Émílókàn is an understatement ─ it shows how desperate such a person is to possess power. We should not elect desperate political candidates.

Oguntibeju Anthony

I support the bill. This constitutional reform would enhance governance, foster stability, and promote accountability. By eliminating the distraction of re-election bids, leaders could focus on implementing their policy agendas, driving sustainable development, and upholding public trust. This measure would also mitigate the risks of electoral manipulation, incumbency abuse, and partisan gridlock. To ensure the integrity of this extended tenure, robust checks and balances, transparent oversight mechanisms, and rigorous accountability frameworks must be institutionalised. This would safeguard democratic principles, entrench good governance, and uphold the sovereignty of the Nigerian people.

Damilare Taiwo

The bill is unnecessary because there is already a constitutional privilege that provides a four-year tenure for presidents and governors. If the bill succeeds, the rule of law would be affected. Tenure increment would not have a real impact on the polity. The proposed bill would serve as a relieving atmosphere for lazy government practices and political representation efforts of those who have the ambition to serve rightfully would be discouraged.

Emmanuel Ojatunwase

I do not see any progressivism in the proposed bill. Nigeria is a country without socio-economic and political ideologies, and we have not recorded any stable economic policy and growth yet. So, the bill cannot be of advantage to the country. Presidents and governors would only look at short-term wins, instead of long-term national development.  However, the bill might help reduce scheming, sit-tight syndrome, and electoral manipulation.

READ ALSO: Suspected ritualist sells human skull, legs for N70,000 in Ibadan