Will a 6years single tenure improve our democracy and fast track development in Nigeria? October 19, 2011 13 comments Posted by Youngstars Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website Comments wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 9:12 am ziko The problem with Nigerian democracy at the moment is not the issue of tenure but the issue of failed statesmen, what has delayed our development has not been the tenure of 4 year and 8 year for second tenure, it is the failure of leadership, we have and are building strong institutions, but when such institution are mounted by weak people, without clear vision and direction, the system fails to work. So i submit that the problem is not a single tenure, because even with a single tenure and you have weak leadership development will not come. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 9:30 am Daniel Stephen the longevity of time does not affect the impact you create. If they (our leaders) had been prepared for the post they were given before they got into power, they would have not been misbehaving because their problem now is the fact that they went with a heart of greed and not of service. Any public servant should see his election as an avenue for service and not to steal. We the upcoming ones should prepare for that position with a productive mindset we can create the development we seek. it is impossible for an unproductive mind to get to affluence and not steal. if our leaders can be productive i mean creatively they would breed solutions instead of slowing down our development. in summary, if you are considering a position in public service then you must be prepared before you get into the system by forming values which will help. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 12:19 pm mcmary 6yrs single tenure may just be what we need for more development in the country. Billions of naira are spent on conducting elections for a term of 4yrs and leaders get nothing done after 2yrs in the name of familiarization and use the remaining 2yrs to rush up their agenda, believing they have a chance for 2nd term in office to complete their said agenda; and people may want to vote them in to complete what they have started. With 6yrs single tenure, leaders will be more focus, knowing that they have just the time they need on their hands to get theirs agenda done and the issue of 2nd term in office may just be a dream. Also, the country will spend less on a 6yrs single tunure of conducting elections to 8yrs 1st and 2nd term. I will like to also state here that the issue of crises during elections especially in the north, that has to do with ‘this 1 na our own, this 1 na their own, this 1 no do well, this 1 go do well’ will be forgotten because 2nd term elections always comes with crises. And people fear for crises towards election year will be reduce. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 1:32 pm basseyduke the problem in Nigerian democracy, governance and development is not the issue of tenure but the issue of lack of vision,genuine interest and prioritization. Any person who has a vision will always have steps to achieve the vision and then prioritize the activities to be used to achieve the set goal.I like the idea of a single term, but i have a proble with the number of years. One with a genuine interest in the governance and development of the country will need a maximum of 5 years to stay in the office, use the first 3 years to implement at least one policy that will bring about change and development (stable power supply) and the other two years to adjust some other policies that already existed and keep enforcing them to achieve its expected result (housing, health, education, employment, security,etc ). Six years in my opinion is like adding extra one year for them the steal more money. while on the other hand, i support the single tenure proposal. My reasons are these: election will only be near free and fair but not free and fair because of the power of the incumbency, projects will be suspended because everybody is busy having one caucus meeting or the other on how to out smart the voters and the opposition parties. Tax payers money are sink into conducting fruitless election every 4 years, school students are keep at home when they should be in school. these people toss our economy here and there, back and forth without any regards, their state longer in power is like having old soup in the pot, but adding spices every time you want to dish to people, they get easily distracted from their aims by greedy Party faithfuls who think they should be pleased at the expense of the populace, If they keep return for second time, then tomorrow will never come and the dream of the youth becoming the future leader will only be a mirage and a kiss of death. With the single tenure leadership, really development in Nigeria will be fast tracked. because young emerging leaders and democrats would have gradually and eventually emerged as leaders, and given their wealth of innovation, creative thinking, the struggle for sustainable development would be a think of the past. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 2:31 pm basseyduke this may interest us to know: Onyeabo China Ifeyinwa wrote:…. Human beings! 23 yrs ago, precisely in 1988,d den SUG president of d Univ of Jos led a team of students who rioted against d den military dictator’s (IBB) removal of oil subsidy. He termed it, “a crime against d Nigerian masses & a war against d poor”. That SUG president is Mr. Labaran Maku, d current Minister 4 Information who has said d removal of oil subsidy is long over due. How times Change…??? how values and belief change where money and power are involved ?….. you see, if we have these people serve in one single tenure, they give way to others to also mount the leadership and put forth ideas that are born from genuine belief without fear or favour. “This is Chop make i Chop” wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 2:33 pm basseyduke this may interest us to know: Onyeabo China Ifeyinwa wrote:…. Human beings! 23 yrs ago, precisely in 1988,d den SUG president of d Univ of Jos led a team of students who rioted against the then military dictator’s (IBB) removal of oil subsidy. He termed it, “a crime against d Nigerian masses & a war against d poor”. That SUG president is Mr. Labaran Maku, d current Minister 4 Information who has said d removal of oil subsidy is long over due. How times Change…??? how values and belief change where money and power are involved ?….. you see, if we have these people serve in one single tenure, they give way to others to also mount the leadership and put forth ideas that are born from genuine belief without fear or favour.” wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 2:44 pm clinton Well Fellow democrats, we’ve been betrayed by our leaders, in as much as i believe in the 6 years single term President, and governors and as many times as possible for our legislature, the opinion of a member of this forum who commented on the issue of GREED, ABUSE OF OFFICE and CORRUPTION is a very big issue in Nigeria. Fmr. President Obasanjo tried all he could to extend his tenure, even though am not seeing this move by the President as a way to extend his hold on power like his counterparts in Africa, if only the national assembly will enact a bill that will make it impossible for any in-coming Presidency to manipulate the constitution and reverse it again, it is a welcome development even though it has already created suspicion from different quarters. Again Jonathan will not be allowed to contest, because if he did, then it will amount that he has become the longest President to have ruled Nigeria and it will undermined his integrity. But outside these perceived fears, we still have to look at the benefits and demerits of that proposal, if the benefit outweighs the demerits why not go for it. Therefore, a single tenure of six years for the president and state governors is a positive idea and a well-considered patriotic opinion based on the following arguments: 1. The incumbent office holders would fight to complete their second term, which they regard as a right while their deputies and other interested candidates would like to slug it out with them. In the process things would almost fall apart and every arsenal would be deployed to win the elections, but with a single term such will cannot happen, he|shes will endeavor to work hard. 2. with our current system as we have witnessed for the past 13years now: The incumbent would pilfer the state treasury, including his security vote to fight the election and this gives him a considerable lee way against opponents. The incumbency factor is a dreaded weapon, which put them ahead of their opponents. Where the incumbent president or governor is contesting with other presidential or gubernatorial candidates, the incumbent has an array of advantages. Such election is already flawed because it is lopsided. Again few months to the end of his term, the governor would dislodge the local government councils and appoint his cronies to head the council and lead his re-election campaign efforts. The incumbent, therefore, has a field day, manipulating the system against his opponents. 3. The only language the political players understand is bribery and corruption from primary to general elections. Bribe is offered during elections from council ward to state constituencies, National Assembly, Senatorial zones and indeed the whole nation. Should this be allowed to continue? Most electorates are unmindful of election manifestos of political parties but are concerned with immediate gain in the area of gratification, thus, I believe in this proposal by Mr. President , it will help in the fight against Corruption, and that is one of the many reasons why the CORRUPT will definitely fight to finish to abort this well taught step in repositioning of our country Democracy even more stronger than that of America. 4. To sustain this proposal, if it eventually sails through at the National Assembly, a bill will also be enacted that will make it impossible to urgently changed the constitution by any President, may be for at least 50years, this proposal will handle as well the agitation of ROTATIONAL President of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as each geo-political zone will bring out a well breed leader to represent that region whenever it is their to turn. If we did not checkmate our current system, what is happening in countries like Zimbabwe, Uganda, Cameroon etc with their sit-tight presidents may happen here one day and that will out-rightly lead to total disintegration of this country, even though some are saying that it not possible for that kind of leaders to surface. Lets support him Mr. President. Clinton 08068475053 wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 3:42 pm Chukwu Isaac Chinedu Fellow democrats, the issue of six years term is like a double edge sword which we Nigerians should handle carefully. I listened to people’s argument on this issue, like… - He already has a four years term and if it is allowed he would start manipulating in 2015 for another six years term. This is his trick and what we all need is to reject it because if we do not, there would be problems in 2015. - The desperation by the incumbents for second term has resulted in murders and so on. We can adopt six years single term now and later revert to two terms of six years when we mature. - The negative effect of the bill over weighs the positive side as the current practice affords Nigerians the power to re-elect the incumbent leader or elect a new person. But looking to the above arguments analytically, you will see that it is not tangible since the six years term is for constitutional amendment. So if the six years single term is properly arrange by the legislature, such statement will not be the outcome of the proposal of six years single term. Again, the president even said that he may not be the beneficiary of the proposal. That is to say that his intention is not for tenure elongation but for good of our country. To me the six years single tenure will be of good beneficial to our country because of the following - The six years single tenure will help one to use the first year to settle down and five years to perform, instead of using one year to settle in office, perform for a year and half and use the rest to fight for second tenure which mostly derails them from providing quality services. Six years single tenure will stop this and make them to be focus and provide good quality service to the people. - Again is that the cost of election is very high. For instance we spent more than 50billion naira to conduct 2011 general election both the one given to INEC and security agents, but is just few days ago that Jonathan lunched 50 billion YOUWIN. If such money spent in election is directed to other sectors it will help in advancement of our country. If our leaders will only be sincere with six years single term it will go along way in development of our country. Our duty is not to be against the proposal, what we need is to ensure that when the bill is pass, we should maintain it to be single tenure. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 4:25 pm popoolaio To the best of my understanding, 6 years single tenure is not the solution to the present predicament we find ourselves in Nigeria. What we are lacking in the leadership structure today is the lack of visionary leaders. Such leaders that have already prepared their manifestos right away before going for the general elections. In the reality, such type of transactional leaders are very few in our political offices. For instance, it takes somebody with a ready-made blueprint less time to implement his/her programmes while getting to the office. On the other hand, it takes a longer period of time for another person who has no implementable action plans. He or she just has to consult experts at the inception of his/her office and before such consultants are through with their finds, it will take a long period of time. In the case of the governor and/or president, he/she also has to prepare the blueprint, discuss it at the executive council level before it is passed to the parliament for deliberations, sometimes public hearings are conducted, report back to the house for the second and the third readings fore the final passage. What is importance is that if our leaders are visionary, it will take them less time in understanding the yearnings and aspirations of the ruled which is important in deepening the democratic values and development in our country. A case study of the turn around project of Gov. Babatunde Fashola during his first tenure in Lagos State is enough proof that leadership is not by the length of time you spent in an office but what you have achieved from the period of time that you have spent while in the office. Lastly, the proposed amendment bill for the tenure elongation before the national assembly is not intended for the development of the country but to empower the elected leaders for tenure elongation. May the Lord protect us from the acts of un-patriotism. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 7:14 pm eghosa kings The six years single tenure that is propose by the administration of president Goodluck Jonathan is a proposal that has entertain criticism from various interest group in country must especially the opposition political parties. The six years single tenure if implemented properly will bring stability to the political system in Nigeria. In this sense both the executive and legislative arm of government will have enough time to plan and execute their plans. It’s observe in Nigeria that when a government leaves offices the successor abandon their plans and vision of his predecessor and focus on a new agenda thereby resulting to abandon project. The six years single tenure will help the legislative arm of government to consider and pass bills without the interruption of election that distract the parliamentary system of government in a country. The single tenure will also encourage the implemention capital project that some government delay to campaign for a second tenure in office also the huge sum of money budget for election in the first and second tenure is drilling the nation, looking at the past election where fifty billion naira was given to I.N.E.C and a supplementary budget of twenty-five billion, one will have a rethink and consider the six years single tenure. On security ground the last election was characterized by post election violence in some part of the north resulting to the killing of people and destruction of properties worth billions of naira. So with the single tenure i believe some this crisis can averted and the people can hold their elected leaders more accountable. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 9:20 pm davingson …Nigeria needs strong institutions and great men too. So, the period one stays as a political leader to a large extent doesn’t guarantee development. However, i strongly suggest 6years single term for Nigeria Government because, evidences has shown that criminal activities in Nigeria is always at its peak during elections. Weapons and arms are being smuggled into the country during this period mostly by those running for second tenure in office because they have the money and the authority. Government funds and property, in different manners are being used to create unequal opportunities, inorder to secure second tenureship. But, if 6years single tenureship is adopted, it will give room to equal opportunities and less crisis during the electoral processes. In view of all this few illegalities that goes with second tenureship in political office, i still suggest we adopt 6years single term into our governance…. Davingson wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 11:06 pm Abiodun Phillips The six years single term is not applicable in our system of government and it will not yield potential growth for our democracy neither will it fast track rapid development in the nation. There will be more development in the four years two terms because it will allow for challenges and check mates a leader effectiveness if probably he performed well or not against the 6 years single tenure which is more or less will increase corruptions and bad leadership. wrote on October 19th, 2011 at 11:59 pm fagro The idea is largely a dangerous one. What this simple means is that from day one when a good number of our corrupt office holder or potential ones are elected into office they will decide to abandon the electorate and you cannot do them anything given Section 308 which provides immunity for them. Only one condition will this idea be a people –oriented one and that is to have the immunity clause expunged from the constitution or reviewed heavily to allow for checks before the expiration of the tenure of an office holder. The bill proposing this is not fit for our democracy at this stage. Have you wondered why the rate of development in communities and states is high when elections are about a year away? With a single term system; it means – Get into office and damn the people since you will never be going back to them caps in hand for their votes. The right of the people to preserve the mandate of their leaders at the shortest time possible through renewal is what a perverted system like ours need in the interim pending when proper sanity would reign. Mr. President with all due respect should let his performance elongate his tenure. Why 6 years when you can get 8 years in two sets. The timing of this leaves ashes in the mouth. The Maslow’s Hierarchy of need concept in management should be borrowed perhaps. A six-year single tenure is not a need on the base of the Maslow’s pyramid; not when security and infrastructure – two key needs for a governed people are eon years away from us.