By Inalegwu Shaibu

Some of the Senators who shared their perspectives on the proposal for a six-year single term of office have shown the trend the debate on the amendment will follow in the Senate.

Senator Babayo Gamawa, PDP, Bauchi North, described the six-year single term as the road to corruption and under performance by the President and the governors.

He kicked against the proposal saying it will make the incumbent to under-perform knowing full well that he will not be eligible for re-election.

He said: “Everybody has his or her own ideas when it comes to politics. But in politics, there should be room for opposition and checks. If we allow single term of six years, somebody will forget to do something good for the electorate because they know that they are not coming back for elections.

“But leaving the four year single tenure as we have now with an option of another four years if you are lucky to be re-elected will make the incumbent to do something good for the people. I think the two terms is good for us. There will be more productivity and more accountability to the people.”

Senator Chris Anyanwu, Imo East, Imo State: “Why is that a priority at this period? We want to overheat the polity, the governors have just been elected, trying to centre down and face governance. I would have loved a situation where the government will start dealing with the problem in the Niger Delta, insecurity, unemployment, Boko Haram; it is not a national priority. Let us talk about Nigerians who want their problems solved, deal with the problems in the society before talking about power sharing.’’

Senator Ifeanyi Okowa, PDP, Delta North: “I support two terms of office because it gives the public room to assess you midway before the election. If you as a governor or president perform or not, the electorate will assess you and decide whether to vote for you or not, but the single tenure does not give room for them to assess you. You can actually just come on and do whatever you like and then go because nobody will assess you knowing that you are not coming for election again.

”Stakeholders must be brought on board to decide whether Nigeria needs six years single term or four years. For now, there is constitutional provision for a four-year term of office for the president and the governors. Anything then has to come through amendment of the constitution. We just came out of election and the people of Nigeria voted for four years. We need to have a stakeholders’ view on this and any change should only come up through amendment of the constitution.”

Senator Ita Enang, PDP, Akwa Ibom: Single term of six years is a wicked move. Anyone who is thinking of the single six-year term at this critical period of the nation’s democracy is wicked. What should preoccupy the minds of Nigerians now must be how to support President Goodluck Jonathan in  the   delivery to the people the dividends of democracy.”

Senator Smart Adeyemi, PDP, Kogi West, however holds different views saying six-year single tenure will remove frictions and engender development in the country.

“I think it is good if you take into consideration our development and our diversities as a people. It is not out of place because it will enable us stabilise the polity because every area knows that it will get to them. It will enable Nigerians to have a sense of belonging, because the fear of marginalisation will be gone, as every section of the country will not feel they are being marginalised.

   Senator Uche Chukwumerije, PDP, Abia observed that the four-year term is not enough, but a six-year single term should be enough for any one who comes to office with a vision to settle down and carry out development work.

“With single six-year term, the people would be sure of power shifting to all the geo-political zones of the country.” He added.

What Reps are saying

By Ben Agande

Samson Osagie, Deputy Minority Whip, House of Representatives:

“I believe that at this time of our national history when the citizens are so much interested in the improvement of their lives and reinventing the economy, the President who said he has a transformative agenda should be talking to the people in a way that would show that indeed, he has the capability and the willingness to deliver on the promises he made.

This is a nation, for instance, that prides itself as a major oil-producer, yet, it has not a single refinery working. We produce crude oil, yet we import refined products. Does that area not require transformation? This is a nation with so many resources yet we lack infrastructure. There is no power, no roads; the carnage on our highway is monumental.

Does a government which believes that it has a transformation agenda not know that these are areas that they should be talking about? I believe that it is a misplacement of priorities; it is preposterous and unacceptable that the President at this stage should seek to embark on a voyage that was not part of his campaign. This is an abandonment of the core issues that formed the basis of his campaign. This is capable of heating up the country and give the opportunity for people to begin to suspect the president and his motives. The debate is going to be destructive.

“Performance is not a product of longevity. It is rather a product of the ability of the occupier of a public office to articulate issues that concern the people and address their concerns. The issue of tenure is not one of the problems of this country. Four years is enough to make an impact. Nigerians are not expecting that one president will solve all their problems, so, why do you want to saddle us with a president or governor that will serve for six years and can choose to do nothing because he has not intention of coming back. It is unpatriotic.”

Emmanuel Jime: “I do not think it is something that should be mentioned at this point in time. What we should be doing is providing leadership that would make a difference in the lives of our people. Some people benefited from the 1999 constitution, especially in the states. How then do you ensure that you operate it in such a way that it is morally consistent with its operation? What does it matter whether you have a single term or a two term? The advantages that are associated with a single term are neutralised by the many disadvantages inherent in it.”

Ken Chikere: “I believe that with the knowledge of the people now, it is a good proposal that should be look at dispassionately. I believe that we should take out time to take a further look at it but on the face I think it is a good proposal. If you look at the acrimony and the expenses that come with election is one aspect of our national life that should be looked into. It is a drain on the resources at the individual and national levels. If we remove the second term, it would be better for the individuals and the country.”

Esemeh Oyiboh, “As a politician and one desirous of a peaceful nation, I think it is a good thing. You discover that during the first term most occupants of the executive office would use the major part to building structures preparatory for the second term contest. If it is a single term, the occupant knows that he has only one term and he would concentrate on providing purposeful leadership for the people who voted for him”.