Gov. Makinde Proposes 6-Year Single Term for Nigerian Elected Officials: A Bold Step or Political Disruption?

Admin
2 days ago
3 min read

Introduction: A Radical Call for Reform

In a political system often marred by incumbency abuse, re-election desperation, and endless campaign cycles, Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State has proposed a bold solution: a single six-year term for all elected officials in Nigeria.

Speaking at a recent public policy forum, the governor argued that the current four-year renewable term structure encourages short-term thinking and distracts leaders from effective governance. He believes a six-year, non-renewable term would promote focus, reduce election-related tension, and improve accountability.

This proposal is not new — but it’s making new waves in 2025, especially as Nigeria navigates post-election fatigue and growing calls for constitutional reform.

What Gov. Makinde Actually Said

Governor Makinde emphasized that:

“A six-year single term will reduce the distractions of re-election politics. Leaders will have the time and clarity to implement long-term plans without being trapped in the cycle of politicking.”

His remarks follow a wider national discussion on restructuring, especially amid rising insecurity, economic turbulence, and governance inefficiencies.

Makinde, widely regarded as one of the more pragmatic and reform-driven governors in the country, is using his platform to advocate deeper institutional change, not just surface-level adjustments.

Understanding the Current System

As it stands:

The Nigerian Constitution allows for two four-year terms for presidents and governors
Lawmakers can be re-elected indefinitely as long as they win elections
Frequent electioneering cycles often start midway through a term, especially in presidential and gubernatorial offices

The result? Leaders spend nearly half their first term campaigning for a second, leaving crucial policies delayed or abandoned altogether.

Why a Single 6-Year Term?

Here’s what a six-year single term could potentially fix:

Challenge	6-Year Term Solution
Endless campaign cycles	Allows leaders to focus on governance
Abuse of incumbency for re-election	Eliminates incentive to misuse state resources
Policy inconsistency	Promotes longer-term planning
Political instability	Reduces the frequency of tense elections
Budget manipulation	Prevents election-year spending sprees

It’s a trade-off: longer accountability window, but zero chance for continuity through re-election.

Global Precedents: Who Else Does It?

Several democracies have experimented with single-term presidencies:

Mexico: One six-year term (no re-election)
Colombia (formerly): Had single four-year term before 2005 reforms
Philippines: One six-year term
Liberia (proposed): Similar calls for single-term restructuring

In these systems, the focus is on leadership without political survivalism a rare quality in modern politics.

Supporters Applaud the Vision

Political commentators and civil society leaders have voiced tentative support:

“Makinde is speaking to a core dysfunction in Nigerian democracy,” says Dr. Amina Musa, political science professor at ABU Zaria. “Too much time and public money is spent on campaigning, not governing. A single term may rebalance priorities.”

Others point to the high turnover of governors and lawmakers after just one term even when performing well as evidence that re-election isn't necessarily tied to public satisfaction.

Critics Raise Valid Concerns

However, the proposal is not without backlash:

Lack of electoral reward: A governor or president who performs well will not have the chance to return.
Corruption risk: Knowing they won’t be re-elected, some leaders may loot with impunity.
Weak institutional memory: New leaders every 6 years could result in inconsistent national direction.
Political resistance: Incumbents and lawmakers may oppose a system that limits their ambitions.

Some argue that the problem isn’t tenure length, but enforcement of performance metrics and anti-corruption laws.

The Constitutional Hurdle

To implement this reform, the Nigerian constitution would need to be amended. This involves:

Two-thirds approval in the National Assembly
Endorsement by 24 out of 36 state Houses of Assembly
Presidential assent

Given the political implications, self-interested lawmakers are unlikely to support reforms that cut short their influence unless massive public pressure is applied.

Final Reflection: Can Nigeria Rethink Leadership?

Governor Makinde’s call for a single six-year term is more than a policy suggestion it’s a test of Nigeria’s political maturity.

Will we continue with a system that encourages short-term populism, or evolve into one that fosters long-term planning and principled leadership?

It’s not just about tenure length it’s about vision, structure, and trust.

What Nigeria needs is not just new leaders. It needs a new leadership system that works.

🖊️ By WorldWire News – Governance & Policy Desk

📣 What do you think about the six-year single term proposal? Should Nigeria amend its constitution?

Drop your thoughts in the comments or send your perspective to: info@worldwirenews.xyz.