As our nation grapples with the challenges of a flailing economy, it is astonishing that some lawmakers are more focused on extending their own tenures than tackling the pressing issues at hand.
The recent proposal to amend the constitution and increase the term limits of elected officials from four years to six years is a misguided attempt at reform that carries significant risks to our democratic principles.
Proponents of this bill argue that a single six-year term will reduce electoral costs and enhance governance efficiency.
ATTENTION: Click “HERE” to join our WhatsApp group and receive News updates directly on your WhatsApp!
However, this supposed reform is a thinly veiled attempt to consolidate power and undermine the very foundations of our democracy.
The dangers of elongating democratic tenures are twofold: entrenched inefficiency and the subtle erosion of democratic principles, paving the way for authoritarianism.
A six-year term may seem attractive in theory, promising stability and continuity in leadership. However, it is a slippery slope that can lead to complacency and abuse of power. History has shown us that unchecked power and prolonged tenures can result in dictatorial tendencies, stifling dissent and opposition.
We must not be swayed by the promise of stability and instead prioritize the principles of democracy, accountability, and good governance.
Our elected officials must be held accountable for their actions, and the current four-year term provides a necessary check on their power. Extending their tenure will only serve to undermine the trust and faith that the people have placed in them.
Furthermore, this proposal is a clear distraction from the pressing issues that our nation faces. Rather than focusing on economic growth, job creation, and social welfare, our lawmakers are more concerned with securing their own power and privilege. This is a betrayal of the public trust and a gross dereliction of duty.
We urge our lawmakers to reject this proposal and focus on the real issues that matter to Nigerians. We must prioritize democratic principles, accountability, and good governance over the selfish interests of those in power. The future of our democracy depends on it.
However, the risks associated with such an extension are deeply rooted in
the nature of power dynamics and
democratic accountability. Extended terms can undermine the very essence of democratic governance—frequent and rigorous checks and balances.
A prolonged tenure can lead to the
consolidation of power. In a democratic system, regular elections serve as a vital mechanism for holding leaders accountable and ensuring that they remain responsive to the electorate.
The prospect of an extended term reduces the frequency with which leaders must answer to voters, potentially allowing for more significant accumulation of power and influence.
This could encourage political leaders to prioritise their personal agendas or those of their political allies over the public good, knowing they have a longer period to secure their positions without immediate electoral threats.
Moreover, extending the term could weaken even more our near-death democratic institutions and processes.
Frequent elections are not merely about choosing leaders; they are about reinforcing the democratic fabric of society by encouraging political participation, fostering a vibrant opposition, and ensuring that governance remains transparent and accountable By extending terms, there is a risk that political institutions might become less dynamic, less responsive, and more susceptible to manipulation and corruption.
The opposition’s role in scrutinising government actions and proposing alternatives could diminish, leading to a less competitive political environment.
Another critical concern is the risk of
perpetuating a cycle of undemocratic
practices. History shows that once a term extension is adopted, it often leads to further adjustments in favour of incumbents.
Leaders might exploit extended terms to amend laws and extend their rule, a pattern observed in various nations where democratic practices have deteriorated into
autocracy.
In Nigeria’s context, where political instability and corruption have been persistent challenges, such a shift could exacerbate existing vulnerabilities.
Furthermore, the argument that longer
terms will reduce electoral costs overlooks the fundamental purpose of democratic elections. The costs associated with elections are not merely financial but are integral to maintaining a robust democratic process.
Elections provide an opportunity for public engagement, dissent, and renewal of political mandates.
By extending terms, we risk diminishing
the vibrancy of our democracy and
compromising the democratic principle
that power should be periodically
contested. Not to mention that in Nigeria,
most of the electoral costs incurred are
for non-official reasons.
The case of Obasanjo’s attempt of a third
term should be a lesson to all Nigerians to
resist any infringement on the democratic
rights of citizens. The Representatives, if
truly are not rubberstamp, should instead
resist this idea from whatever quarter it is coming from.
READ ALSO: Court Refuses To Declare Seats Of Pro-Wike Lawmakers Vacant, Affirms PDP Membership
A six-year democratic tenure poses
significant dangers to the health of Nigeria’s democracy. The temptation to consolidate power, weaken democratic institutions, and perpetuate undemocratic practices should
not be underestimated.
Instead of extending tenures, the country should focus on strengthening its electoral systems, improving governance structures, and fostering a political culture that values accountability and democratic engagement.
The health of a democracy depends not on the length of tenure but on the robustness of its institutions and the vigilance of its people.
