Nigeria’s checkered history of democratic practice – once bedeviled by intermittent military rule and frequent political upheaval prior to 1999 – appears at last to be finding its rhythm. Recently, there has been growing discussion surrounding A Motion for Term Limits for Legislative Positions as a key reform to further strengthen Nigeria’s democracy.
Be that as it may, glaring loopholes and inadequacies remain, which must be addressed to further strengthen democratic structures for greater effectiveness. Introducing A Motion for Term Limits for Legislative Positions is one way to help address these lingering issues.
In other words, certain principles that could deepen and consolidate democracy are still regrettably absent and ought to be enshrined.
Take, for instance, the rotational presidency principle adopted by several political parties in Nigeria, including the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), which stipulates the periodic rotation of the presidency between the North and the South.
This convention has, without doubt, gone a long way in stabilizing and strengthening democratic structures. A similar arrangement operates in many states, where the governorship rotates among the three senatorial districts.
These rotational practices, alongside statutory term limits for executive offices at the three tiers of government, help prevent sit-tightism on one hand and lopsidedness on the other, thereby promoting equity and inclusivity in the polity. They are commendable initiatives.
Regrettably, however, term limits have not been extended to the legislative arm. This omission has created a situation where individuals occupy senatorial or constituency seats for unnecessarily long periods, often serving multiple terms to the frustration of other aspirants. It is clear that A Motion for Term Limits for Legislative Positions could address these challenges.
Politics is often described as a zero-sum game, where the winner takes all and the loser must wait for another opportunity. In a country where a significant portion of the national wealth is concentrated among the political class, allowing a few individuals to monopolize access to public office for extended periods is unacceptable.
Access to the “national cake” through legislative representation should be broadened to accommodate more citizens.
This imbalance is counterproductive. It breeds despair, despondency, and political apathy among those repeatedly shut out of the process, forcing them to wait indefinitely for a chance to serve. Sit-tightism in any elective office is condemnable in all its ramifications.
Understandably, frustration has driven many aspirants into what is commonly described as political harlotry – jumping from one party to another in pursuit of elusive opportunities. This is often a grueling and disheartening experience.
More so, in a part of the world where political ambition is highly capital-intensive, a system that allows one individual to retain office indefinitely—often leveraging state resources to entrench themselves – while others wait helplessly on the sidelines is unjust and demands urgent reform. Therefore, A Motion for Term Limits for Legislative Positions would be a step toward greater fairness in representation.
A maximum of eight years is sufficient for any politician to make their mark, after which they should step aside for others or seek higher office. Alternatively, they may even choose to serve in a lower capacity if so inclined. After all, there have been instances in Nigeria where a former deputy governor later contested for and won a councillorship seat. Life, indeed, goes on.
There is nothing so extraordinary about legislative roles that should grant undue advantage to a select few. A nation cannot thrive with a large population of disgruntled and hopeless citizens. Continuing on this path is to tread dangerously.
Admittedly, amending the Constitution to introduce such limits may prove difficult, given that incumbent legislators benefit from the current arrangement. In the meantime, political parties have a responsibility to adopt internal rules enforcing term limits for all elective offices as a matter of convention, and prioritizing A Motion for Term Limits for Legislative Positions is essential.
As the 2027 general elections approach, familiar faces – senators and honourable members who have occupied these offices repeatedly – are once again rolling out their campaign machinery, as seen in the proliferation of posters across the country.
Public office is neither a family inheritance nor a lifelong entitlement. Policymakers must resist the temptation to copy policies from other climes without adapting them to Nigeria’s unique realities.
If it is argued that term limits apply only to executive offices because of their contentious nature, it must also be acknowledged that legislative offices, though less contentious, are not exempt from intense competition – especially given their oversight functions and access to constituency resources.
All Nigerians have an equal stake in the polity. No one should be relegated to the role of a perpetual bystander while a privileged few continuously benefit from public resources.
Conventions – like consensus and judicial precedents – form an integral part of democratic practice worldwide.
The time to end the sit-tight syndrome across all elective offices is now, as Nigeria looks ahead to the next general elections.
Written by Comrade Akido Agenro
45 Ike-Oluwa Street, Iju-Ishaga, Lagos, Phone: 09066999968
