Re-kitting the tenure-elongation kite

This Day newspaper (December 12, 2013) and quoted as saying that the “National Assembly might consider extending the tenure of the President and Governors whose present tenure would expire in 2015 for another two years as part of the initiative, aimed at resolving the threat that the 2015 election bodes.” Senator Ekweremadu, who was speaking […]

This Day newspaper (December 12, 2013) and quoted as saying that the “National Assembly might consider extending the tenure of the President and Governors whose present tenure would expire in 2015 for another two years as part of the initiative, aimed at resolving the threat that the 2015 election bodes.” Senator Ekweremadu, who was speaking in Lagos at a dinner with a select group of reporters, particularly expressed concern at the turn of events in the body-politic pertaining to the 2015 elections. According to him, the idea was coming at a time the President had initiated the process for national conference and that the proposal could come through a new motion because the idea of a single tenure was previously shot down by the constitution review committee.
Even before Ekwerema-du’s latest revelation or hint, some prominent Nigerians, including former Vice Pre-sident Atiku Abubakar, had expressed misgivings about hosting national dialogue too close to the 2015 elections. These are well-meaning concerns about the practical limitations of hosting natio-nal dialogue in the face of this reality, which the President and his Advisers probably had overlooked. If the proposed initiative of two-term tenure extension “sails through,” according to the Deputy Senate president, “it would be a precursor to the single-term tenure earlier proposed in the constitution review process.”
Senator Ekweremadu added that “the additional two years would simply allow the present actors to be eased out of office and allow for fresh start, almost without tension.” He goes further to explain: “if you look at what is going on now, all the core problems we are having in all the parties are about the issue of succession. So we believe strongly that the matter can still be revisited.”
Now the question is: is this latest initiative workable? Senator Ekwerenmadu argues all those elected should complete their four years tenure and that the initiative would remove the tension in the polity. He particularly argues that those fighting the President because of the perceived “fear that if the President gets his second term by the time they are gone, he would start to chase them. He said the way to solve the problem is that, after two years, both the President and the Governors would go, which might remove that fear and ease the pressure on the polity.
Devoid of any political sentiments, Ekwerenmadu’s observations are sensible and understandable. In fact, no sincere Nigerian would deny the reality of the issues raised to justify the impending effort towards two-year tenure extension for the President and Governors. It would take hard work and good luck, however, to convince cynical and sceptical Nigerians of the necessity or desirability of tenure extension at this time. Regardless of the merits of the arguments of tenure extension at this time, such skeptical Nigerians would stubbornly hold to their suspicions about the motives (if any) of the latest proposal announced by the deputy Senate president.
What may actually feed these scepticisms and cynicisms have a lot to d with our previous experiences with tenure elongation efforts, which collapsed thanks to their inherent credibility problems. The most notorious example of tenure elongation contro-versy was former President Obasanjo’s attempt to amend the constitution in 2006 and tamper with his constitutional term limit of eight years in office.
Gen. Obasanjo’s excuse was that he needed more time to complete the “good work” he started. Despite this explanation, however, critics were up in arms against his tenure extension plot and the Senate, clearly reading the mood of the country, voted overwhelmingly on May 16, 2006, to kill the proposal. Public sentiments against Obasanjo’s third term agenda were so hostile that majority of Nigerians were not even ready to pause and give a thought to the merits (whatever they were) of the proposal.
Therefore, the Senate’s biggest burden or albatross this time around is how to convert public scepticism into understanding and sympathy. Senator Ekwerenmadu’s arguments about the latest two-year tenure elongation for the President and Governors are persuasive and sensible. Sadly, however, can Nigerians let go those sentiments with which they opposed Obasanjo’s tenure extension ambition? In the words of the former Soviet leader, Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, “public opinion is a capricious beast.” I really sympathize with President Jonathan, even if this two-year tenure extension didn’t originate from his own office.
When President Jonathan set up the Senator Femi Okorounmu Committee, his critics, mainly from the opposition, maintained that the effort was diversionary and needless waste of time and that, with the National Assembly in place, there was no need to organize such dialogue. In fairness to President Jonathan, there had been previous vociferous advocacy for national con-ference, dialogue or whatever name so called. As soon as he announced the establishment of the dialogue committee, however, the same agitators for national conference started attributing motives to his action.
Such level of cynicism and scepticism in a country like Nigeria, where critics suspect a hidden agenda in every policy or proposal is enough to drive any leader nuts. However well-meaning the latest tenure extension may seem, its biggest burden is credibility, the same albatross that destroyed Obasanjo’s third term agenda. There is no doubt that the date of the national dialogue is too close to the 2015 elections. It is also indisputable that the rebel-Governors are in mortal fear of the President if they complete their two remaining tenures.
If these arguments are viewed more objectively, the latest tenure extension proposal by the Senate is harmless. It remains to be seen how our lawmakers can successively convert public scepticism into sympathy or support. Will the opposition parties let it be without making a political capital out of it?

Zagga wrote from Abuja, <[email protected]>;