Opinion
The Single Term Palaver
Arnold Alalibo
Our beloved country of good people is about to convulse once again in a contrived controversy on the ongoing constitution amendment. The polity is beginning to feel warm. The crosscurrents of nonsense, intrigues, dishonesty and lies characterizing the amendment exercise are entertaining for some and revolting to many more. The politicians are the manufacturers-in-chief of this and other controversies. No prizes for guessing why. Contrived political controversies generate rich political rewards for those who are smart enough to be counted on the side of the emperor.
The bone of contention as you must have guessed is the amendment of the constitution to a single term of six years for the president and governors in contradistinction to the extant two terms of four years apiece. The single term was not an original idea of the current Senate that is in the forefront of its agitation. It was first broached by former President Olusegun Obasanjo during the Second Republic.
The idea also enjoyed the informed opinion of the Political Bureau established by General Ibrahim Babangida in 1986 as part of the many national experiments to convince all Nigerians that they are as much stakeholders in the Nigeria project as anyone else, no matter how small their tribes might be and therefore fully entitled to lead as well as to be led. The Bureau had recommended single five-year tenure for the president and governors respectively.
At the very inception of his tenure in 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan made a similar proposal of six-year tenure for the president and governors and cited political bickering and wrangling that usually characterized the election of second term seekers as reason.
When the single tenure idea was again mooted at the constitutional conference that produced the 1999 constitution, it was rejected by the departing military regime in favour of the existing two terms of four years each. Since then agitation for single term has always been echoed by individuals and groups.
How much time a leader stays in office is imperative particularly when seen against the backdrop that our own political leaders have transformed into monarchs of a sort. The United States of America, the country after which our constitution is patterned, has settled this issue long ago. Before Franklin Roosevelt was elected in 1932, the office of the American president was limited to two terms. However, Roosevelt was the only American president that stayed beyond two terms. While he was on the verge of doing his fourth term, he died in 1945.
Harry Truman, who succeeded him, established the Hoover Commission in 1947 to look into the prospects of presidential term limits. The result of that was the 22nd Amendment of 1957, which limited the American president to two terms, or a maximum of ten years where a president had started off by completing the tenure of another as is the case with President Jonathan. The idea of a single tenure presidency was nevertheless seriously considered in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal.
Proponents of two term presidency here in Nigeria argue that the term ensures that a painstaking president has sufficient time to complete his programmes or at worse take them far. Also, they say, it can be used to punish non- performers by replacing them or reward those who work hard. On the other hand, those for single tenure asseverate that it is less expensive and less contentious. For that reason it suits our peculiar circumstances.
Those who argue that two terms serve the purpose of reward or punishment as the case may be and permit a hardworking president to complete his laudable programmes, miss the point entirely. Commonsense should tell us that the Nigerian environment is unique and lacks any of its type globally. Single tenure is not synonymous with non-performance. In the first place, if responsible leaders are voted into office, the instinct in them will urge them to go after a good name. But should they fail to perform, the impeachment option is there. Also, the party machinery can whip them into line.
I agree with the single tenure position of the senate. I am an avowed advocate of this proposal for two reasons. First, the president or governor will devote more of his attention to his office rather than dissipate energy over the question of re-election as is being witnessed now. If the truth must be told, a reasonable part of the first term is devoted to the re-election project.
Two, and finally, it is far less expensive, a position already canvassed by its proponents. It is heart- rending that Nigeria spent about N122.9 billion in the 2011 general election. If this becomes the pattern, the country will spend that amount once in six years and twice in 12 years as against four and eight years respectively. As for the contention as to whether the proposal should take effect in 2015 or not, that should be left for Nigerians to decide.
Opinion
Professor Kamene Okonjo: A Life Beyond Motherhood
Quote “Professor Kamene Okonjo
Some women leave behind more t
Yet, to remember Professor Kam
Professor Okonjo was the belov
one of the most dramatic chapt
On December 14, 2012, the then
She leaves behind children, gr
Professor Kamene Okonjo deserv
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Opinion
On Ancestrial Worship: My Take
Quote: An African who invokes
This is the concluding part
… Given the fact that I was
At the end of the visit by the
Back to my apartment, at abo
Under normal circumstances, yo
That all she asks is that Chie
For some reason that I do not
I believe that everyone in hu
Our ancestors have not gone fa
By: Jason Osai
Opinion
FG’s Transport Support And Rivers Workers
The Federal Government’s approval of a N70,000 monthly transport intervention for public service workers for six months, beginning in November 2026, offers hope to employees struggling with the rising cost of living. The agreement with the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), reached at a conciliation meeting in Abuja on October 27, is intended to cushion transport costs and ease pressure on workers’ incomes. But for public servants in Rivers State, it raises a familiar question: will the State Government key into the intervention and ensure that its workers benefit? The agreement provides for N70,000 monthly across all levels, for six months. The Federal Government also approved peculiar allowance arrears effective from May 1, 2026, to be paid in three equal instalments beginning in November.
The parties agreed to reconvene after one month to assess implementation. Ultimately, the value of these resolutions will be measured not by announcements but by whether eligible workers receive the money. Transport costs consume a substantial share of many civil servants’ earnings before they can meet household needs. Support for commuting is therefore not a luxury or political favour; it is temporary assistance to help workers remain at their jobs without sinking further into hardship. For lower-paid employees, transport costs can turn modest salaries into a daily exercise in difficult choices and sacrifice.
The agreement also urges State and Local Governments to participate and unions to press for implementation. The federal agreement does not automatically guarantee that every State and Local Government employee will receive the support. State authorities must clarify how it will apply to their workforce, make the necessary arrangements and publish a payment timetable. Rivers State must approach the arrangement with urgency and transparency. The Government should State whether it will implement the intervention and when payments will begin. Any administrative or financial question should be addressed promptly with organised labour, not allowed to become excuses for delay.
The concern is sharpened by the earlier N35,000 monthly wage award introduced by the Federal Government in 2023 after petrol subsidy removal. It was intended as temporary relief pending a new national minimum wage. While several States negotiated and paid wage awards or related sums, implementation nationwide was uneven. Reports in 2024 indicated that many States had failed to pay the federal award, while others provided different amounts. In Rivers, labour and media reports raised concerns about implementation of the N35,000 award for State workers, amid separate announcements and arrangements concerning Local Government employees.
The wage award was meant to ease the immediate effects of subsidy removal, yet workers faced uncertainty over whether the promised relief would reach them. In February 2024, the Rivers State Government announced approval of the N35,000 award for local government workers, but subsequent reports showed that implementation across worker categories remained a concern. The lesson is clear: approval and implementation are not the same. A declaration at a meeting offers little comfort to a worker whose account does not reflect the promised payment. For workers who travel to their offices daily, the implications of delayed support are significant. Transportation expenses compete with food, rent, school fees, healthcare and other essential household needs.
As fares rise, employees may be forced to reduce spending on necessities or borrow to sustain their families. A timely transport intervention would therefore provide practical relief and demonstrate that government understands the economic pressures confronting its workforce. Its temporary nature makes prompt implementation even more important. It is fair to acknowledge that this transport intervention is a new agreement and that its administrative details may require clarification. Rivers State should not be condemned in advance for a failure that has not occurred. Nevertheless, the earlier experience gives workers legitimate grounds to seek assurances before the November commencement date. The State should avoid allowing uncertainty to persist until workers begin asking why the promised assistance has not arrived.
The NLC and unions in Rivers State should engage the State Government immediately and seek a written commitment, an implementation plan and a process for reporting missed payments. If clarification from the Federal Government is needed, the State should seek it without abandoning the goal of providing relief. Labour leaders must also keep members informed about progress and insist that any agreed arrangements are applied fairly and transparently. The Rivers State Government should treat this intervention as an opportunity to rebuild confidence. Timely support would show that workers’ welfare is more than a talking point and that the State recognises the economic realities confronting its employees.
Silence, delay or selective implementation, by contrast, would revive frustration over earlier relief measures and weaken trust between government and labour. Every month lost to administrative delay leaves workers facing the same transport burden without the intended assistance. The State should consult labour, publish arrangements and pay eligible workers on time. Rivers workers should not have to wonder whether federal relief will reach them. The Federal Government has announced the support; now the State must make its position clear. We hope the N70,000 monthly transport intervention will not follow the troubling path of the earlier wage award. Rivers State should learn from that experience and ensure that this time, relief is not merely promised but delivered.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
Rivers3 days ago
Don Seeks Repositioning Of Tech Education For Dev
-
Education3 days agoPAMO MEDICAL UNIVERSITY -Nullifies Arrest warrant on VC
-
Niger Delta3 days ago
PANDEF Seeks 50% Oil Derivation Allocation Increase
-
Education3 days agoIAUE MOVES TO END GHOST WORKERS SYNDROME AS 400 NEW NON-TEACHING STAFF UNDERGO MANDATORY ETHICS TRAINING
-
News3 days agoFresh Ebola Scare As NCDC Records Two Cases
-
News3 days ago
Customs Partners EFCC, NDLEA, Others To Tackle Money Laundering, Terrorism Financing
-
Politics3 days ago2027: South-East Govs Insist On Tinubu’s Re-election
-
Politics3 days ago2027: RIVERS GUBER CANDIDATES SIGN CHARTER TO PRIORITIZE CITIZENS’ DEMANDS
