Nigerians Divided as Push for Single Six-Year Presidential Term Ignites Fears of Elongation

A proposal by Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele to introduce a bill seeking a single six-year tenure for presidents and governors after the 2027 general elections has sparked significant debate and heightened fears among Nigerians regarding potential tenure elongation for incumbents. Bamidele stated that this legislation, intended to be among the first introduced in the next Senate, aims to enable elected leaders to concentrate solely on governance, free from the distractions and political calculations associated with re-election campaigns under the current two-term arrangement. He argues that a single tenure would eliminate the need for office holders to devote their first term to preparing for a second.

However, immediate reactions indicate widespread concern that the proposal might serve as a backdoor plan to extend the terms of current office holders who would otherwise be constitutionally barred from seeking re-election. While Bamidele did not specify if the bill would apply to those currently in office, many respondents expressed skepticism about its altruistic nature, fearing that incumbents would exploit it if it becomes law. Conversely, some proponents believe such a system would genuinely allow leaders to focus more on governance rather than political maneuvering for a second term.

Legal experts confirm that the proposed bill would necessitate extensive constitutional amendments to become law. Barrister Kamilu Ahmad-Paki, a Kano-based lawyer, explained that the 1999 Constitution currently mandates a four-year tenure, renewable once, for both the president and state governors, as stipulated in Sections 137 and 180 respectively. He emphasized that these sections, along with Section 182 (barring governors from more than two terms) and Section 137(1)(b) (imposing the same restriction on presidents), would require alteration. Ahmad-Paki also noted that even the tenure of local government councils under Section 7 might need review. He further highlighted that Section 9 sets a stringent amendment process, requiring the support of two-thirds of the National Assembly and approval by at least 24 state Houses of Assembly.

Other legal minds and political commentators have voiced strong opinions. Abeni Mohammed (SAN) suggested that some lawmakers, including Bamidele, might be acting out of 'self-preservation' ahead of potential rejection by the electorate, rather than national interest. He expressed concern that this political distraction is sidelining critical national issues like insecurity. Similarly, Salam Jawondo (SAN) echoed the necessity of constitutional amendment via a two-thirds majority but doubted its success given current national priorities such as insecurity and hardship. He warned against political distractions, urging a focus on problem-solving.

Dr. Kamar Hamza, a Niger-based political scientist, acknowledged the proposal's potential good intentions but also raised the possibility of it being politically motivated, perhaps as a 'hidden agenda' by other politicians. Barrister Morakinyo Ogele, another constitutional lawyer, outright labeled it a 'guise to elongate the tenure' for the current president and governors, expressing strong skepticism about its passage and the motivations behind it.

On the other hand, Sunusi Musa (SAN) supported the idea, framing it as part of Nigeria’s constitutional evolution. He argued that a single six-year term could significantly reduce election costs by decreasing their frequency and would empower leaders to make difficult but necessary decisions without the pressure of seeking re-election. Musa cited former President Goodluck Jonathan's similar proposal, which failed partly due to public mistrust regarding whether Jonathan himself would benefit. He cautioned that the current amendment’s wording must explicitly preclude anyone who has already served eight years from benefiting to prevent incumbents from seeking an additional six-year term.

It is reported that this marks the third time such a constitutional amendment is proposed in Nigeria's current democratic dispensation. Previous attempts include one by allies of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, seeking to extend terms to three four-year terms, which was overwhelmingly rejected by the Senate. Former President Jonathan's 2011 proposal for a single, non-renewable six-year term also failed to pass the National Assembly.

Public commentator David Adenuga urged Nigerians to assess the proposed single tenure based on its impact on governance, accountability, and national development, rather than partisan politics. He stressed that the success of any political system hinges on strong democratic institutions, credible elections, and effective leadership, not merely tenure length. Adenuga called for broad consultations and objective analysis, emphasizing that national interest should precede partisan considerations in ongoing electoral and constitutional reforms. The discussion, which has resurfaced amid ongoing constitutional amendment debates, poses a fundamental question: whether a six-year single term presidency is a beneficial reform or a dangerous shift that could weaken democratic accountability in Africa’s largest democracy.