I must confess that the original title of this piece was ‘The Sense in Single Term’. But because a big tree cannot fall without the grass and ground noticing it, it became imperative to revisit the piece to see how the subject relates to the leadership style Nelson Mandela.
Mandela was selflessness and courage personified. His 27 years in prison, his willingness to lay down even his life to bring freedom to his countrymen and women made him a hero of all times.
But Mandela’s decision to take just a single term, even when his countrymen and women would have been glad to have him as life President or at least seek a second term in office according to the Constitution of South Africa made him a legend.
Rather, Mandela demonstrated that single term of just five years (1994-1999) was more than enough to dismantle and heal the wounds inflicted by apartheid, entrench racial harmony, robust multiracial democracy, and profound socioeconomic transformations in South Africa.
He did not need a second term to “complete the good works he started” or to endear himself to the entire world, such that in death, as in life, the world and its leaders have literally stood still for this great son of Africa. His homes have become a Mecca of sort to people of all races.
Expectedly, our own political elites are also falling on themselves to pay tribute to Madiba. Sadly, not many of them are ready to live or make a quarter of Mandela’s matchless sacrifices in national interest.
I find their glowing tributes to Madiba for taking a single term and achieving so much under it so laughable and hypocritical because this is the same single term they have always hit with sharp criticisms at home.
For instance, the initial reaction to single term was that it was a ploy to shortchange the North on its 8 years entitlement to power when power eventually reverts to them. Some said it was a ploy to elongate President Goodluck Jonathan’s tenure.
But when the Senate Committee on Constitution Review recommended it with a proviso that the incumbents would not benefit from it, the incumbents, including some presidential aides who initially saw it as our magic wand for arresting a perennial disease made a “U turn” and accused Senator Ekweremadu and the Senate of plotting to undermine President Jonathan and governors second term.
Here is a question directed at Senator Ekweremadu in a Thisday interview of June 16, 2013: ”How would you react to this speculation that the decision of the Committee to exclude certain categories of elected office holders from benefiting from the single term proposal was aimed at making ways for some members of the National Assembly that have aspirations…? And precisely, it is being alleged that you are working for Senator David Mark’s presidential ambition.”
Here is part of his response: ”Nobody is working towards anything, and as a matter of fact, for those of us who believe in providence, we believe that power comes from God not by scheming. Those who have been presidents of Nigeria didn’t get there by scheming…But we (the Committee) said those who are there now, if we say they should benefit from it, the implication therefore is that if any of them wins a new election, it means he is going to spend 10 years instead of 8 years. That is an option. The second option is that we exclude them and appeal to them to make personal sacrifice in the interest of the country because those involved are basically the president, his vice, governors and their deputies.”
Sanusi is a political analyst based in Abuja
No comments:
Post a Comment