The Federal Government and the National Assembly have been urged to holistically address the recommendations contained in the 2014 National Conference, tagged 2014 CONFAB which seeks to restructure the country to achieve greater success in all facets of life.

Political and public affairs analysts who spoke with The Point in their separate interviews, described the revisiting of six years single tenure of office and rotational presidency by the Nigerian lawmakers as piecemeal approach to the confab report, arguing that implementing the contents of the confab report isolation would leave Nigeria in more mess that it is presently.

Since the tenure and rotational issues are part of the recommendations of the confab, the analysts argued that implementing them in isolation would be counterproductive, maintaining that the report should be adopted and implemented holistically for all-round transformation of the nation’s socio-economic and political challenges.

Recall that the confab on restructuring set up by a former President, Goodluck Jonathan made some recommendations on how Nigeria can be restructured to achieve greater success as a nation.

The conference touched virtually all aspects of the socio-economic and political challenges besetting the country such as resource control, fiscal federalism, devolution of power, creation of states, forms of government, revenue allocation, ethnic nationalities and minority question, and resolution of the herdsmen and farmers’ crises.

It recommended part-time legislature, removal of immunity clauses for criminal matters, independent candidacy, and The Diaspora participation in voting, unbundling of the Independent National Electoral Commission, privatisation of existing refineries and stoppage of sponsorship of pilgrims.

“A lot of things look innocent on the face value but there are deeper meanings underneath. Is a single term good? If you ask me, that’s the way to go to make us serious in Nigeria. But how sincere and genuine are the proponents? We must put our eyes on the National Assembly on this matter”

The confab also recommended that anybody aspiring to become the country’s President must be a degree holder. It approved the rotation of Presidency between the North and South and governorship among the three senatorial districts of each state. Also, any elected official, executive or legislative, who carpet-crosses, regardless of the reasons for such, shall automatically forfeit his seat among others.

However, some of the analysts posited that six years single tenure for public office holders would embolden politicians to be more corrupt, adding that it wouldn’t make any tangible difference from the status quo.

One of the analysts, Ayo Ologun, claimed that what political office holders are doing is to isolate the confab report to divert attention of Nigerians to the hunger and misery plaguing the country.

Canvassing for holistic implementation of the report, Ologun said, “It is unfortunate that what our lawmakers and President are doing is to isolate the 2014 confab report and taunt the ones that are beneficial to their agenda. They are not sincere about addressing the challenges.”

Describing the discussions that the single tenure proposal has generated, the commentator stated, “One thing that the Senate has been able to achieve is to divert our attention from serious things to trivial issues like tenure in office. We have more pressing issues on our hands than negotiations or discussions about a single or two terms. If you have looked at the trajectory of the whole National Assembly, with no apology to any of them, they have collectively resolved to always divert our attention from very germane issues to issues that are frivolous.

“They are not doing anything new, just like the Federal Government said, this proposition started from the Olusegun Obasanjo days, and we should also not forget the Justice Uwais report practically captured it as well just like we have it stated in the confab report.”

He explained that single tenure without sincere political office holders with interest of Nigerians at heart, the nation would not experience any positive change.

“It is not about the system, it is about the people that get into office. If you maintain the two terms of four years, the first term of every office holder is always done with the fear of the people at heart because they fear that the people might not give them a shot at the second term. They fear that their party may not be able to come back into office. When you pinch them, when you hit them, they tend to re-address themselves, they tend to do things better than how they would have done it with the fear of re-election and sustenance of their party in power, that is why the first term of every Governor is always better than the second.

“Just like we are witnessing in Oyo State and a few others where you would have thought it would be Eldorado all along. So, if you put that into consideration, that means we are saving ourselves from disgrace, we are saving ourselves from non-performance by allowing the present status quo to remain so that those governors will continue to have the fear of reelection and the fear of sustenance of their party in power which would not be if it were a six years single term.

“Once six years of single tenure is implemented, politicians will have these I don’t care attitude towards the people since they are no longer seeking a second term. They know that whether they do it well or not, their six years will be complete because they don’t have fear of impeachment except in very rare cases in Nigeria. So, when you give a man a single term of six years, he knows that after that six years, he is not coming back to do anything; it becomes an issue of absolute power which corrupts absolutely.

“Since he is not seeking a reelection, he can decide to deal with you in those six years knowing full well that his name will not be deleted from record as a former governor or President. So, we stand the risk of being abused as a people, as being misgoverned as a people, by these people whom we often elect into office. They will not care about what becomes of us because they have a single tenure of six years to run. So, if you put that as an insight, then we are at risk if we adopt the six years single term.”

Ologun further revealed that if President and Governors have not been performing well within the eight years two terms they have presently, then, six years would not still be sufficient for them to make any positive impacts.

According to him, “In the first tenure of every Governor, they only have two years. The first year, they find stability, in most cases, they don’t get it. With court actions and all other things, trying to settle the fight within their party, they don’t create anytime for serious governance. It is only the second year in most cases that most governments think to do anything for the people. In the third year, it is for consolidation and jumping from one place to another to meet political leaders in preparation for the second term. The fourth year is the election. Therefore, if we now revert to six years of single tenure, two things will happen. Most governors will embezzle for five years and use one year to work. They have five years of full relaxation.”

Professing way forward, he said aside from the full implementation of the report, “We need to redefine our leadership procedure. Politics is learned by experience. We should redefine our leadership process. There are those who have been in power without people knowing that they exist because they are giving good governance.

“We are seeking single tenure because our politicians are not performing. What matters to us is the result. We are in this mess because of the failure of the people that have been elected into office. Let us work on the quality of people that get into office. We should not follow the moneybags politicians but people with records in leadership. If we have free and fair elections, then election results will be acceptable and there won’t be litigation. With this, the president and governors can hit the ground running immediately they get into office.”

In the same vein, another analyst, Fatai Tijani, noted that extending the tenure wouldn’t solve the problem of Nigeria, saying that attitudinal change of the people in power would go a long way in turning around things for good in the country.

For Tijani, “Nothing is wrong with the system. What is wrong with it is the operators, those in charge of the system.”

He added, “The people whom we call leaders today, nobody is interested in the number of years their government serves. We are interested in the people who will get into governance and know what the people need in government. Things don’t happen abruptly. Disruption doesn’t happen abruptly. Economic disruptions take gradual processes and the building will not also happen in a bang. If the padding thing has been on since 1999, we don’t expect that we go to bed and the next morning, somebody will just come and take them away. And that’s the way economists think. The moment successive administrations have not been able to get it right, then it would be a bit difficult for the current administration.”

The analyst called for holistic and sincere restructuring, saying, “Governance with sincerity will go a long way. A lot of things are being shrouded in secrecy in government and that is why things are not working.

“The moment successive administrations fail; it will be difficult for the current administration to make any headway in eight years. Till date, we can’t pinpoint what is happening in Nigeria, especially the one that should come from the government. For instance, we don’t know what is happening with fuel subsidies. Government has not been sincere with the citizens and extension of tenure or making it single is not a solution to our problems.”

The publicity secretary of the New Nigeria People’s Party, Ladipo Johnson, said it was not a bad idea, however, he warned that the move must not be to extend the tenure of the current administration.

Johnson said, “The proposal makes sense; some countries are doing it. But it must not be to elongate the tenure of this government?”

A lawyer, Udo uduak, said it was obvious the current system was not working and that the country needed a change.

He noted that such amendments should be part of the holistic change that should be carried out in the constitution going forward.

“Is it not obvious that the current system is not working? We need a new constitution, or a comprehensive amendment should be made and part of it should be for single tenure for president and governors to save us from this logjam and trouble we often see because someone wants re-election. They can now face governance, knowing you have only one term,” he said.

A former president of the Nigerian Bar Association, Olisa Agbakoba, said he supported one term of not even six years but four years.

According to him, “Why do I need two terms of eight years to do whatever I want to do as President? Anybody who is serious about governance can make the mark in two years. How long did it take Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) to turn things around in America in the 30s which could be termed one of the worst periods in America? Don’t forget that it was from him we now have 100 days in office that politicians celebrate. Within 100 days FDR had made his marks. But we don’t see such hunger to do the right thing here. We wait for the second term.

“It is this illusion that ‘O, I have more four years’ that elected office holders waste their time and the time of everybody. If I had four years as a president, within two years, I would have done the major work I need to do. I don’t need eight years. It is a waste of time.”

A former party leader who spoke on condition of anonymity said that Nigerians must “shine their eyes” to know where the proponents are coming from.

“I just want to warn Nigerians to shine their eyes to know where those making the proposals are coming from. A lot of things look innocent on the face value but there are deeper meanings underneath. Is a single term good? If you ask me, that’s the way to go to make us serious in Nigeria. But how sincere and genuine are the proponents? We must put our eyes on the National Assembly on this matter,” the politician said.

A public affairs commentator, Andrew Okon, argued that the desperation for a second term is not necessarily driven by patriotism or the passion for service, but by the obsession with the greed for power for its own sake.

He was of the opinion that the two terms of four years have been a curse rather than a blessing to Nigeria since 1999, and needs an urgent review in view of prevailing events that have characterized elections in Nigeria.

Okon said, “If the bill sails through, it would be great. Two terms of eight years have not really helped Nigeria. A serious and good leader hits the ground running the moment he is inaugurated. But what we see here is a situation where the president and governors gallivant all over the place in the first two years they should have sat down to work, the third year they begin to plot for re-election thinking they would do magic after re-election.

“What we have now is good enough if we have purposeful leadership to drive it. Even if we return to the regional government today, what we will have is the decentralization of corruption”

“If I may ask, how long did Murtala Mohammed last in government as the head of state in Nigeria? But within that short space of time, every Nigerian knew a leader was in the saddle. I am sure, if that man had lasted for two years, there would have been a great change in the country. So, it is not about how long, it is how well.”

Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, dismissed agitations for six years single term for president and state governors by federal lawmakers. He noted that the country had more pressing, bigger and challenging issues facing it now than the term limit for president and state governors.

“I don’t think the suggestion of a six-year single term for the president is part of the issues facing Nigeria,” Falana said.

The Conference of United Political Parties said the main challenge facing Nigeria today is not the tenure of political office holders but the question of purposeful leadership.

Spokesperson for the group, Peter Ameh said Nigerians must also change their mind set about public office.

Ameh said, “What we have now is good enough if we have purposeful leadership to drive it. Even if we return to the regional government today, what we will have is the decentralization of corruption.

“What we should be looking at is putting in place appropriate sanctions for those who loot the treasury and deny citizens the basic necessities of life.

“Our people are suffering, they are hungry, infant and maternal mortality in Nigeria is one of the highest in the world, these are things our lawmakers should be concerned about.

“No matter the system you have in place, if those who are to drive it lack sincerity, it will take us nowhere. Let’s not deceive ourselves.”

Speaking in a similar vein, the National Coordinator of the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria, Emmanuel Onwubiko, described the pursuit of such a bill at this point in Nigeria’s history as misplacement of priority.

According to him, “Such a bill is a misplacement of priority. What we need now is equity and the National Assembly needs to pay attention to this. We have more serious issues such as insecurity and our dwindling economy.

“On the issue of equity, one more state should be created for the South East. It is becoming increasingly worrisome that each time the issue of constitutional amendment comes up, tenure of political office holders comes up.

“The constitution should be used for a substantial period of time before any major amendment is carried out. This ritual of amending the constitution every four years is not taking us anywhere.”