A fresh wave of conversation is sweeping through Nigeria’s political landscape as lawyers, activists, and interest groups push for a major overhaul of the country’s governance system, one that would replace the current two-term structure with a single, six-year term for both the President and state governors.
At the heart of the conversation is a shared frustration: the enormous public funds burned during re-election campaigns, and the loss of valuable governance time as elected leaders often shift focus from service delivery to securing a second term.
Proponents say a single term would eliminate the cycle of distractions and power play that often begins midway through a first term. Saint Moses Eromosele, a legal expert based in Edo State, believes frequent elections are a burden for countries still grappling with development issues. “We need focused leadership,” he said. “Leaders should spend time working, not scheming for a second term.”
The Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG) echoed that sentiment, saying the current system encourages political manipulation. “Elections in Nigeria are rarely about ideas. They’re battles driven by desperation and misuse of state funds,” said CNG’s Jamilu Charanchi.
In Benue State, traditional leaders argue that a single term could stabilize the political climate and promote better performance, as leaders would have no time to be distracted by succession battles or re-election bids.
From media professionals to academics, civil society groups, and tribal organizations, many believe the idea holds promise. They argue it could reduce election-related violence, shrink campaign expenses, and help public officials focus on long-term goals.
Former Ijaw Youth Council president Eric Omare noted that six years is enough time for any visionary leader to implement their agenda. Others, like public analyst Lanre Ogunsuyi, believe the system could encourage bolder decision-making since politicians would not be trying to please voters for another term.
Some even suggest that the policy could promote fairer power rotation among Nigeria’s ethnic and regional groups — a key concern in the country’s diverse political terrain.
Not everyone is sold on the idea. Several voices have raised red flags, arguing that simply changing the duration of office won’t fix the deeper issues plaguing Nigeria’s democracy.
Alhaji Muhammad Danlami of the Arewa Youth Assembly warned that the lack of a second-term incentive could embolden corruption. “Without re-election pressure, many leaders would likely just loot and relax,” he said.
Others like former ACF secretary Anthony Sani said the idea removes any form of performance reward. “There has to be motivation to deliver. One term, whether you perform or not, sends the wrong signal,” he argued.
Meanwhile, some religious and civil rights leaders believe the system itself isn’t the problem, it’s the failure to hold public officials accountable. They argue that unless Nigeria strengthens its legal and electoral institutions, any structural change will simply be cosmetic.
The single six-year term proposal is sparking passionate debate, but the broader consensus is clear: Nigerians are tired of the current system’s wastefulness and inefficiency. Whether this proposal leads to real change or becomes another unrealized reform will depend on how deeply the country is willing to confront not just term limits but the culture of governance itself.
