Former Governor of Abia State and Senator representing Abia North Senatorial District, Orji Uzor Kalu, has called on his colleagues in the Senate and the House of Representatives to amend the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to provide for a six-year single term for the President and state governors.
Senator Kalu, who is a member of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Review and Amendment, made the call in a video interview he posted on his Facebook page on Sunday, October 19, 2025.
He said the move would reduce political tension, promote stability, and allow elected leaders to focus on governance rather than electioneering.
“In my private opinion as a person, I would like to appeal to my colleagues on this committee, chaired by the Deputy Senate President, Senator Jubril Barau, that our members in the Senate and the House of Representatives, chaired by Hon. Benjamin Kalu, should come together and agree to do the six-year single tenure,” Kalu stated.
“Because people are busy fighting after four years. They are fighting for another term. Let everybody who is coming know that he is just coming for a six-year single term, and there will be no rancour or problems. Let us devote most of our time to giving Nigerian people what they want.”
Kalu further argued that the single-term arrangement would reduce corruption and ensure that public officials focus on improving the welfare of citizens.
“Everybody needs enjoyment. I want the Nigerian people to have the enjoyment of democracy,” he said.
“That single tenure can give them what they want, provide food on their table, provide adequate transport, provide access to movement for them, and security.”
He also urged lawmakers to consider Nigeria’s economic realities when making constitutional decisions rather than copying Western models.
“A single term is the best tenure to go with, and that will give confidence in our democracy. We must not do what the American Constitution is saying. We must change some of those things in the American Constitution because we are in a developing country,” Kalu said.
According to the lawmaker, Nigerians “are suffering because we want to do what the presidential system of America is doing, and our economy cannot carry it”.
“I see a lot of people in the executive arm in a hurry to acquire more wealth to be able to run for a second term. This (single term) will stop it,” he said.
Kalu suggested that the reform could take effect either in 2027 or 2031, depending on when the National Assembly and stakeholders reach a consensus.
“We can start this from 2027 or 2031, I don’t care. Even those that are governors now can run for a six-year single tenure from 2027 or 2031. It doesn’t make any (different) meaning.
“If we decide, we can amend the constitution to start from 2031, or we can amend it to start from 2027. It is for the good of Nigerians,” he said.
He added that his proposal was borne out of a desire to strengthen Nigeria’s democracy and not for personal political benefit.
“Nigerians should start appreciating for us to do what is for the benefit of our people. I don’t care the name anybody will call me. I will always speak and say the truth,” Kalu maintained.
“I said that in Africa, Nigerian journalists are the best, and I still stand by it. I said that in Africa, the Nigerian judiciary is the best, and I still stand by it. We have to stand up to speak the truth.”
The proposal for a single tenure for the President and governors has been a recurring issue in Nigeria’s political discourse.
Advocates argue that it would help curb the high cost of elections, minimise political tension, and reduce the tendency for incumbents to manipulate electoral processes in their bid for re-election.
In 2011, then-President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration floated a similar proposal for a single six-year tenure, thoughhe clarified it would not apply to him if passed.
The idea was, however, widely criticised and eventually shelved, with opponents claiming it could entrench incumbents or destabilise the transition process.
Critics of the idea maintain that a single term could deprive citizens of the opportunity to renew a performing leader’s mandate, while supporters argue it ensures fairness and compels leaders to deliver results within a defined period.
For marketing and advertising, or publishing your promotional content, contact us at [email protected]
