By Ilobi Austin
Arguments for and against, some acidulated, have poured-in,
ceaselessly, into the public space since the new media adviser to Mr. President
made public the desire and intention of his principal to have the tenures of
office of Governors and the president either reduced to a single term,
collapsed into a single term or in-between, made an extended single term. For reasons, he gave the cost,
which includes security and economic, of running an election every four years
and the need to focus government at each level on the development of the
country which entails taking tough decisions which in most cases are left until
second term is in the bag.
But for some of those
opposed to the idea and which happens to constitute the virulent group, the above
reasons are only a smokescreen for an attempt at tenure elongation, by the
president. This the president has personally debunked and, early too, unlike
what used to be the case in the immediate past by stating in unmistakable terms
that this regime would not benefit from the proposal.
Even though he did not say what would become
of governors still in their first term, I will submit that I am not bothered
about this elongation angle of the argument as all such previous attempt had
always experienced a crash-landing that took life out of such projects.
Remember Gowon, IBB, Abacha and more recently, Obasanjo.
So rather than
dwell on a suspicion that is built on a tenuous chain of assumption, since a
draft bill to this effect has not been presented to the National Assemble to
enable the pubic know what is what, I would rather focus on some of the known consequences
of the proposal should it become law, putting forth proposals for their mitigation.
The two main
arguments against single tenure are its high probability of creating dictators
or absolute rulers and complacency, as there would no longer be incentives for
these public officials to be either even-handed or fair-mined in their dealings
with either the larger public or other arms of government like the legislature;
or to develop stronger appetite for making a difference in their immediate constituencies
as would have been the case if there was a second term in view.
As a first step
towards addressing these challenges, one suggests that the immunity clause in the
constitution be reviewed to allow for the prosecution of the governors and
president while still in office by any
member of the public, and not just the EFCC, ICPC or CCB, with the locus
standi, which is to be determined by the plaintiff’s registration as a voter
for the elections.
Apart from this
section on immunity, that which deals with their impeachment should equally be
diluted. To this end, the amendment should make it possible for impeachment
proceedings to be initiated by any citizen, including the NGOs, in a law court
as well as with the legislature.
With the Freedom
of Information Act any member of the public, particularly the NGOs and activist,
with grievances against either a governor or the president for either corrupt
enrichment or non implementation of the budget, a law, as passed by either the
state or national assembly as may be applicable could either approach, in the
form of a petition, the EFCC, the ICPC
or Code of conduct bureau to seek assistance in investigating the purported
breach of the public officer which they deem to have contravened the provisions
of the constitution.
Where the agency
so approached has concluded investigation, it is to communicate its findings to
the petitioner who would be at liberty to cause the assembly concerned to
commence the process of impeachment but where the petitioner believes the legislature concerned to be one and the same
with the governor or executive arm, he will be at liberty to seek
amongst other things, for the vacation from office of the officer through the
courts.
There is no
doubt that a single term without safe-guards against the likelihood of an imperialist
or sole administrator emerging on the scene remains a high possibility. And
unless the process of removal or impeachment is made less cumbersome and the
inalienable rights of both the legislature and the citizenry, the emergence of
a Gadaffi and Mubarak rolled into one would be a matter of time.
A Gadaffian
leader on the block could very easily conspire with sit-tight minded Governors
to intimidate and harass the legislature at every level to endlessly alter the
constitution to meet their selfish ends.
To get to our
promised land therefore, there is no doubt that we will have to part our very
own red sea using methods that are sometimes, indigenous for any form of
government that does not provide a means for the citizenry to reward and punish
it key operators, timely and effectively, is anti-people in the main.
Ilobi Austin, an
analyst writes from Lagos.