Single tenure: A presidential trap or democratic blessing? KAYODE KETEFE Again, the polity is embroiled in another controversy-while the embers of the other fiery issues like Boko Haram, Islamic banking, minimum wage etc are still burning, a latest entrant into our ever-boiling cauldron of controversies, is a proposed amendment to the 1999 Constitution to allow a 6-year single term for president and the 36 governors of the federation. The proposal, to be couched in a bill being sponsored by President Goodluck Jonathan, has spawned invidious discourse that has already polarised the polity. Many political stalwarts, commentators, civil rights activists and members of pressure groups are spewing virulent fire in denunciation while others, still, are busy eulogising the initiative and pouring unstinted hagiography on the president for this "insightful" scheming. Some of these stakeholders have even scheduled meetings on this issue at which fora they intend to churn out their well-articulated positions. The proponents, led overtly by the presidency, posit that a fledgling democracy like ours ought to be spared the recurrent rituals of incessant general elections, which are invariably conducted with acrimonious violence and bloodletting; that if elections of the chief executives, are conducted once every six-year, not only would incidences of violence, rupturing the already thin national political membrane, be considerably reduced, the staggering economic costs of avoidable elections would also be saved. This writer is however of the opinion that seamless political continuity is a systemic thing which rests more on the strength of the democratic institutions and degree to which democratic culture is imbibed rather than on the length of tenure of any cult-hero or political icon. Nelson Mandela did not need more than four years to lay the foundation of enduring democracy in South Africa which his successors have been building on. It took Babatunde Fashola SAN, less than four years to record all those palpable, undeniable achievements which we are all familiar with. Therefore, the entrenchment of a system that fosters greater accountability, checks and controls of public office holders will, by far fetch credible and responsible governance than manipulating their terms of office. The President may mean well, but let us be frank, if any objective person, with a more than dilettante knowledge of Nigerian political affairs, is asked to propose a single way to move Nigerian forward at this particular time, through legislative intervention, he is most likely going to suggest a reform in the diverse interrelated areas dealing with restructuring of our federal structure, especially the aspect of fiscal federalism. He would propose decentralisation of the concentrated powers at the centre, issues like creation of state and community police, re-evaluation of derivative formula, breaking of monopoly of Power Holding Corporation of Nigeria to enable states and private investors generate their own powers; the abrogation of the obnoxious Land Use Act and generally the removal of a number of subject matters, which are bogging down the federal government, from the exclusive legislative list. The said objective and reasonable person may also suggest removal of immunity clause from the constitution, and reform of the electoral system to allow establishment of the bodies like the Electoral Offences Commission, etc. The person, if he is truly unencumbered with any veiled interest, is most unlikely to suggest the tenure elongation of federal and states' chief executives is, at this time, as a matter of urgent, primary concern. A lot has also been said on the avowed non-participation of the President in the dispensation to be ushered in by the amended constitution; this is being peddled ad nauseam to give altruistic colouration to the proposal. To start with, what guarantee do we have for this? As the matter stands, there is no constitutional nor statutory impediment to his candidature. Incorporating a clause into the bill to outrightly invalidate any contingent emergence of the President would therefore achieve more effect than any amount of sophistry. Now, if you excuse my inelegant legal draughtsmanship, I would, as a safeguard, propose a clause like the following, "No person who has ever held office as a President or governor or as a Vice-President or Deputy-Governor prior to the coming effect of this part of the constitution or in any event before October 1, 2015, whichever is later, shall be eligible thenceforth to hold any such office" With this kind of constitutional bar inserted into the proposed bill, the insinuation that the President is selling a dummy about his non-participation would be laid to rest. Be that as it may, even if it is admitted that the President is not going to be a beneficiary, his primary constituency, the political class, will benefit, thus, the ghostly insinuation that the proposed bill is self-serving is still not yet exorcised; the impression that the presidency has got her priorities scrambled up is still not erased. The people have not asked for tenure elongation of the politicians-the initiative is rather farfetched, having no direct bearing on the expected dividends of democracy which they have hitherto despaired of. People are rather more concerned about the extant pressing issues like insecurity, hunger unemployment and decayed social infrastructure-if any politician finds four years insufficient to address these, neither will six-year suffice him. |
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment