By Opeyemi Adelakun
The opposition’s emerging strategy for the 2027 presidential election, built around a single consensus candidate who would serve only one four-year term, has triggered a fresh debate over political trust, constitutional limitations and the practicality of the proposed alliance.
The initiative is being promoted as part of efforts by opposition parties and political actors to overcome competing presidential ambitions, establish a common platform against the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, and offer Nigerians what its proponents describe as a Government of National Competence.
However, the proposal has met considerable scepticism from lawyers, political scientists, civil society organisations and other stakeholders who argue that a political promise to serve for only one term may be difficult to enforce under Nigeria’s existing constitutional framework.
The debate gained momentum following the opposition summit organised under the G-100 platform in Abuja last Monday, where political parties and stakeholders began discussions on a framework for greater cooperation ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Among the proposals from the summit is a Single-Term Transition Charter, alongside a four-year National Reset Programme and a framework for producing a common presidential candidate.
The idea is coming at a time when the possibility of a second term remains a major factor in Nigeria’s presidential politics.
Since the beginning of the current Fourth Republic in 1999, no elected Nigerian president who remained eligible for another term has voluntarily abandoned the constitutional opportunity to seek re-election after completing a first term.
Olusegun Obasanjo served two terms from 1999 to 2007, while Umaru Musa Yar’Adua died in office during his first term. Goodluck Jonathan completed Yar’Adua’s tenure before winning the 2011 presidential election and remaining in office until 2015.
Muhammadu Buhari subsequently served two terms between 2015 and 2023, while President Bola Tinubu, who won the 2023 election, is currently serving his first term and remains constitutionally eligible to seek another four-year mandate.
‘It Makes Little Sense’
A former Special Adviser to ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Akin Oshuntokun, expressed doubts about the ability of the proposal to significantly alter the political calculations ahead of the election.
Oshuntokun said the single-term arrangement would have little effect on the existing political arithmetic.
“I doubt if that suggestion will make any difference to the political arithmetic on ground. And frankly speaking, it makes little or no sense to me,” he said.
He questioned whether Nigerians would realistically demand that a president who performed well should leave office after four years simply because of a pre-election agreement.
He added that the proposal could imply that the candidate would not be expected to achieve enough in office to warrant re-election.
‘Politically Naive’
The General Secretary of Afenifere, Chief Ademola Folarin, acknowledged that a politician could voluntarily decide to serve only one term but warned that relying on such a pledge would be politically risky.
According to him, a president with a constitutional right to contest for a second term could hardly be expected to surrender that right on the basis of a non-binding political undertaking.
“That’s possible, if a candidate chooses to serve only one term of four years. But it will be politically naive for anyone to bank on that,” Folarin said.
He argued that political realities could ultimately undermine such an agreement, adding that only a constitutional restriction would provide certainty.
Constitutional Barrier
Former Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Dr Wumi Bewaji, described the proposal as both constitutionally problematic and practically difficult to implement.
Bewaji, who is also Executive Leader of the Coalition of Democrats for Electoral Reform, CODER, said the existing Constitution and Electoral Act do not provide for a mandatory single four-year presidential tenure.
He argued that even if an opposition candidate entered into an agreement to serve for only four years, the agreement could not automatically override the constitutional provision permitting a president to seek another term.
According to him, the timing of the opposition’s discussions also raises questions about how a consensus candidate could emerge under the prevailing electoral timetable.
Bewaji questioned the possibility of bringing together the various opposition interests when critical stages of the electoral process had already been completed.
He also expressed doubts about the ability of opposition parties that had struggled to resolve internal disagreements to suddenly agree on a common presidential candidate.
‘No Magic’
Bewaji said the opposition had had sufficient time to develop its strategy and suggested that the current push appeared too late.
He noted that several opposition politicians had previously participated in coalition efforts that failed to produce a durable political structure.
“I don’t think there is any magic they can perform at this stage,” he said.
He further questioned whether some opposition parties would be able to field candidates across the country, arguing that internal disagreements and competing interests could undermine the proposed arrangement.
Proposal Viewed As Desperation
The spokesperson of The Osun Masterminds, Ayo Ologun, described the single-term proposal as an attempt by opposition politicians to gain access to power rather than a credible governance reform.
According to him, the Constitution does not prevent a president from seeking a second term, making a political promise to voluntarily abandon that right difficult to enforce.
Ologun also questioned the credibility of parties that were still struggling to agree on a common candidate but were now asking Nigerians to trust them to voluntarily limit their tenure once in power.
He urged opposition parties to concentrate on presenting clear economic and governance programmes instead of relying heavily on political arrangements that may not be legally binding.
‘Political Convenience’
A former chairman of Ijebu North East Local Government Area of Ogun State, Tayo Onayemi, said arrangements made outside the constitutional and electoral framework could amount to little more than political convenience.
Onayemi argued that personal interests and disagreements among political actors could eventually destroy the proposed agreement.
He also warned that the arrangement could reduce Nigeria’s multiparty democracy into a two-party political configuration if not carefully managed.
Constitutional Amendment Required
A former Vice Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Ijebu-Ode Branch, Mr Moruff Balogun, offered a more measured assessment.
Balogun said the idea was possible in principle but could not be reliably implemented through a mere political agreement.
He pointed to Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which provides the procedure for altering the Constitution.
According to him, if the country genuinely wants a single, non-renewable presidential term, the change must be incorporated into the Constitution through the appropriate amendment process.
“The truth is that, to determine the feasibility of this proposal, it should be examined from two perspectives: Is it feasible? Yes. But would its implementation be straightforward? I do not think so,” he said.
He stressed that the Constitution remains the supreme law and that a political charter or agreement cannot override a constitutional provision.
Balogun, however, said a properly designed single-term presidency could have advantages, particularly by freeing presidents from the political pressures associated with seeking re-election.
Such a system, he explained, could allow an administration to focus on difficult reforms without spending a significant portion of its first term preparing for another election.
But he warned that the absence of a re-election incentive could also create new risks.
A president who knew that re-election was impossible could become less responsive to public opinion or potentially exploit the limited period in office if strong accountability institutions were absent.
For that reason, Balogun said the real issue should not be whether politicians can be trusted personally, but whether Nigeria can establish institutions strong enough to enforce accountability.
Focus Must Be Governance
The Head of the Human Rights Department at the Justice, Development and Peace Movement, Abeokuta, Mr Niyi Rotimi, said the opposition must demonstrate that the proposal is about improving governance rather than simply removing the APC from power.
He noted that the Constitution currently permits a president elected for a first term to seek another term, subject to the relevant requirements.
Rotimi questioned what would happen if a candidate who promised to serve only four years later changed his mind and decided to contest again.
He argued that a private political agreement would be difficult to enforce where it conflicts with an existing constitutional right.
He also questioned the timing of the opposition’s effort, particularly given the electoral timetable.
According to him, the opposition parties should have developed their strategy much earlier rather than attempting to resolve critical questions about a consensus candidate close to the election.
Rotimi said any candidate presented to Nigerians should be assessed on competence, integrity, experience, national acceptance, previous performance and a clear programme of action.
Nigerians Should Judge Records
A political scientist, Prof. ’Gbade Ojo of the University of Ilorin, said the proposal might sound attractive but warned Nigerians against relying solely on political promises.
Ojo said the central question was whether a politician who had secured the enormous powers associated with the presidency would still honour a promise made while seeking votes.
He challenged the opposition to make any agreement public and explain the legal mechanism that would compel its candidate to respect the one-term undertaking.
“We must also talk about competence, character, capacity and national acceptability,” he said.
Ojo urged Nigerians to examine the records of political actors rather than accepting promises at face value.
He said the presidency was too important to be subjected to political experimentation based primarily on verbal assurances.
Civil Society Seeks Wider Participation
The National Coordinator of the Civil Society Coalition on Sustainable Development, CSCSD, Dr Tola Winjobi, called for broader consultation on the proposal.
Winjobi said civil society organisations, labour groups, professional associations, youth and women organisations, traditional institutions, regional groups and the media should participate in the debate.
He said Nigerians should determine whether the proposal represents genuine institutional reform or merely an electoral strategy designed to defeat the incumbent.
Winjobi also highlighted the potential benefits and dangers of a single-term presidency.
While the arrangement could enable a president to concentrate on difficult reforms without worrying about re-election, he said it could also weaken democratic accountability if institutions remained ineffective.
“Trust must be earned, not demanded,” he said, stressing that politicians must demonstrate their commitment through a transparent and enforceable process.
‘Do Not Be Carried Away’
The Secretary-General of the Yoruba Council of Elders, Chief Oladipo Oyewole, urged Nigerians to examine the proposal carefully before accepting it.
Oyewole said voters should not be persuaded merely by an attractive promise to limit a president to four years when the Constitution provides otherwise.
He argued that a president could serve one term voluntarily if that was his decision, but voters should retain the right to decide whether the individual deserves another mandate where the Constitution permits one.
One-Term Pledge Not Enough
The Executive Director of the Africa Network for Environment and Economic Justice, ANEEJ, Rev David Ugolor, said there was nothing inherently wrong with promising a single term but Nigerians should demand more than assurances.
Ugolor said politicians had made one-term promises in the past, only for political calculations to change after they gained power.
He therefore challenged the opposition to explain how its proposed arrangement would be made credible and enforceable.
He said the coalition should provide measurable targets, a clear transition programme and institutional safeguards capable of preventing the president from changing course after taking office.
Ugolor also warned that a president who knew from the outset that re-election was impossible could become either more focused on reforms or less accountable to voters.
He said the economic hardship confronting Nigerians presented an opportunity for the opposition, but hardship alone would not guarantee electoral victory.
“The 2027 election should therefore become a contest of records, evidence, ideas and credible implementation plans, not simply a contest of promises,” he said.
Yiaga Africa: Commendable But Requires Caution
The Executive Director of Yiaga Africa, Samson Itodo, described the opposition’s attempt to build a coalition as a positive development but warned that the single-term proposal would require considerable work to gain public confidence.
Itodo said the opposition deserved recognition for attempting to build consensus but noted that the initiative would have to address Nigeria’s political and regional realities.
He stressed the importance of inclusiveness and questioned how a political agreement could compel an elected president to abandon a constitutional right to seek another term.
Itodo also pointed to Nigeria’s history of political actors changing positions when circumstances and interests shift.
According to him, politicians seeking Nigerians’ trust must first demonstrate that they can respect the rules governing their own political organisations.
He cited controversies surrounding party primaries, candidate substitutions and internal decision-making as examples of issues that could undermine public confidence in a broader coalition.
CISLAC: Make Charter Public
The Executive Director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, CISLAC, Auwal Rafsanjani, described the proposal as a legitimate political initiative that could help opposition parties manage their competing ambitions.
However, he stressed the need to distinguish between a pre-election promise and a commitment that can survive the realities of political power.
Rafsanjani said a single-term arrangement could be pursued because the Constitution does not compel an eligible president to seek a second term.
But he noted that the president would retain the constitutional right to contest again unless the relevant provisions were changed.
He called for any proposed arrangement to be contained in a transparent and publicly accessible political charter signed by the participating parties and the candidate.
Such a document, he said, should clearly state the objectives of the proposed four-year government and the specific reforms it intends to deliver.
Rafsanjani said Nigerians are currently facing insecurity, poverty, unemployment, corruption, economic hardship and declining public services, making it necessary for the opposition to offer a detailed and credible alternative.
Ultimately, the growing debate over the proposed single-term presidency has shifted attention beyond the opposition’s ambition to defeat the APC.
The more fundamental question is whether the parties can convince Nigerians that their proposed arrangement represents a genuine plan for national reform rather than a temporary electoral pact.
Leave a Reply