A wave of political debate is sweeping across Nigeria as a growing number of legal experts, civil society leaders, traditional institutions, political analysts, and grassroots organizations call for a constitutional amendment to introduce a single, non-renewable six-year term for the offices of the President and state governors. Proponents argue that this reform would reduce the massive costs associated with re-election campaigns, prevent abuse of state power, and ensure more focused and accountable governance.
The calls for reform come amid rising concerns over how public funds are spent during election seasons, particularly by incumbents seeking a second term. Critics of the current two-term, four-year structure argue that it often leads to a diversion of state resources and a breakdown in governance, as political leaders devote large portions of their tenure to maneuvering for re-election rather than delivering on their mandates.
One of the most vocal advocates of the proposal is Saint Moses Eromosele, an attorney and Executive Director of the Oneghe Sele Foundation in Benin City, Edo State. According to him, the current model is unsuitable for developing nations like Nigeria. He noted that the disruption caused by frequent elections undermines governance, stating that “Nigeria is better served by a single six-year term because it is more focused.” Eromosele referenced former President Goodluck Jonathan, who once advocated the same idea, suggesting he may have done so based on his personal experience with the challenges of re-election pressure. He urged the National Assembly to amend the constitution, citing examples like China where leaders have more time to build legacies without election-related distractions.
Echoing similar sentiments, the Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG), through its National Coordinator, Comrade Jamilu Aliyu Charanchi, described the current two-term structure as a political liability. He emphasized that desperation to secure re-election has in many cases led to the misuse of public funds and the weakening of institutions. According to Charanchi, the first term is often used for scheming and strategizing rather than service delivery, while the second term becomes a period of unchecked power consolidation. He argued that a single-term limit would eliminate the pressure to seek re-election and encourage leaders to focus squarely on governance from the onset. He added that the reform could also restore credibility to the electoral process and save the nation billions wasted on repeated campaign cycles.
In Benue State, traditional leaders under the umbrella of Mzough U Tiv (MUT), Ochetoha K’Idoma (OKI), and Om Nyi’Igede (ONI), threw their support behind the proposed amendment. Speaking on behalf of the tribal bodies, Chief Iorbee Ihagh, Chairman of the group and President General of Mzough U Tiv Worldwide, noted that the current structure has brought more political tension than development. According to him, public officeholders in Nigeria typically spend the first two years governing and the remaining two years of their first term scheming for re-election. He argued that this political pattern has stalled the country’s socio-economic progress, as funds that should be channeled toward development are instead wasted on electioneering activities.
Civil society advocates have also thrown their weight behind the proposal. Dickson Sule, a social commentator, maintained that elections in Nigeria are extremely costly and frequently lack credibility. He argued that a single six-year term would relieve the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of excessive logistical and financial burdens while enhancing accountability in governance. According to him, the reform would also spare the electorate the fatigue of constant political campaigns that add little value to their welfare.
Media expert Isaac Abaa emphasized that one of the core benefits of the proposal would be the ability of leaders to focus entirely on governance. He explained that elections in Nigeria are often associated with massive financial outlays, some of which are illegally sourced from public funds. He added that political institutions and voters suffer from overexposure to endless campaign cycles, which ultimately dilutes the quality of democracy.
John Farinola, an academician, expressed a similar view. He stated that political actors often dedicate the bulk of their first term to consolidating power rather than implementing meaningful policies. Farinola noted that a single six-year tenure would reduce the influence of money in politics and give leaders the time needed to implement long-term reforms. However, he cautioned that the implementation of such reform must be fair and inclusive to ensure that no ethnic or regional group feels marginalized.
Eric Omare, a lawyer and former President of the Ijaw Youth Council (IYC), also spoke in favor of the single-term proposal. He asserted that six years is more than enough for a visionary leader to execute their agenda, although he acknowledged that the struggle for succession could still become an issue in a single-term system.
Blessing Adima, a political activist, described the current two-term structure as a major contributor to underdevelopment. According to him, many politicians spend more time seeking a second term than delivering public goods. He emphasized that a single term would encourage officeholders to serve with focus, knowing they would not return. Adima also highlighted the benefit of quicker power rotation among Nigeria’s diverse ethnic groups, which he said would help foster national unity.
Lawyer and rights activist Henry Olajuwon Ogunbiyi offered a more nuanced view. He noted that both the single-term and two-term structures have merits and demerits, but acknowledged that a single six-year term could reduce distractions from campaigning. Nevertheless, he warned that without strong democratic institutions, electoral reform alone would not prevent political excesses. He advocated for legal frameworks with strict enforcement mechanisms to curb electoral misconduct.
From the Yoruba Council Worldwide, President Aare Dotun Hassan supported the proposal, arguing that the desperation for re-election has led to the neglect of critical national issues. He believes that redirecting resources from campaign budgets to public services would produce tangible benefits for the citizenry and strengthen democracy. According to him, leaders would be compelled to perform well, knowing they have a fixed window to make an impact.
In Bayelsa State, former commissioner Iniruo Wills also backed the idea. He suggested that lawmakers, given Nigeria’s troubled legislative history, should also be subject to one-term or non-consecutive term limits to prevent institutional stagnation.
Otunba Tayo Onayemi, former Local Government Chairman in Ogun State, described the current repeated-term system as counterproductive. He argued that a single term would reduce sycophancy, eliminate excuses for non-performance, and improve time management in governance.
Public analyst and former commissioner Lanre Ogunsuyi argued that a single six-year term would encourage leaders to focus on governance rather than campaigns. He pointed out that with no re-election pressure, leaders could prioritize long-term planning and policy continuity. However, he also warned that the absence of re-election incentives could weaken accountability if not matched with institutional reforms.
Not everyone agrees. Some stakeholders insist that the core issues facing Nigeria lie not in term limits, but in the failure of democratic institutions. Debo Ajayi, former Commissioner for Economic and Budget Planning, noted that without strong oversight and an informed electorate, a longer single term might only grant politicians more time to misgovern. He warned that six years of unaccountable leadership would be more damaging than any financial cost of re-election.
Alhaji Muhammad Salihu Danlami, Speaker of the Arewa Youth Assembly, offered a more critical perspective. He described the single-term proposal as potentially dangerous, claiming it could breed dictatorship and encourage looting. According to him, re-election campaigns—despite their flaws—compel some level of performance. Removing that pressure, he argued, could worsen corruption and complacency.
Anthony Sani, former Secretary General of the Arewa Consultative Forum, echoed this concern. He said a single term lacks the reward mechanism that drives good performance. He recommended instead that Nigeria adopt a system like those in Chile or Uruguay, where incumbents cannot run for re-election while in office, thereby eliminating the abuse of state power without removing performance incentives.
Others were even more skeptical. The Methodist Archbishop of Okigwe Archdiocese, His Grace Most Rev. Biereonwu Livinus Onuagha, said he did not believe that a six-year tenure would bring any change. He blamed Nigeria’s problems on selfish political actors and deep-rooted divisions. According to him, no political reform would work unless the country undergoes complete restructuring to address underlying ethnic and structural tensions.
Elder Joseph Ambakederimo, convener of the South-South Reawakening Group, argued that changing the term limit would not yield results as long as the same crop of politicians continues to dominate the political space. He said the problem lies with the operators of the system, not the system itself.
Environmental activist Alagoa Morris advocated instead for stricter prosecution of electoral offenders and reforms to make public officials more accountable. He emphasized the need for public education and greater citizen engagement in holding leaders responsible.
Abagun Kole Omololu, National Organising Secretary of Afenifere, described the proposal as a red herring. He warned that rather than encourage good governance, a single six-year term might fuel reckless plundering by politicians who know they won’t return. Citing countries like Mexico and the Philippines, he said similar systems elsewhere have not prevented corruption or instability.
Hon. Steve Otaloro, Director of Media and Publicity for the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Ondo State, defended the current four-year renewable term structure. He argued that it encourages accountability and provides citizens with regular opportunities to evaluate leadership performance. He also stressed that frequent elections enhance voter engagement and political innovation.
As the national conversation continues to evolve, it is clear that the proposal for a six-year single term has sparked widespread reflection on the future of Nigerian democracy. While some believe it holds the promise of more stable and focused leadership, others warn that without broader structural reforms, it may simply mask deeper problems in the nation’s governance system. What remains certain is that any change to Nigeria’s constitutional framework must be carefully considered, inclusive, and anchored in a commitment to genuine democratic progress.
Comments