On the 26th of March 2011, during the PDP presidential election campaign, former president Olusegun Obasanjo appealed to Nigerians to vote for Goodluck Jonathan. He confirmed that the PDP still had a zoning policy and also acknowledged that according to that policy a Northerner should have been the PDP candidate since Yar ádua who had recently died had been unable to complete his term. However he pleaded that Nigerians should understand the “accident of history” that threw up Jonathan Goodluck as a candidate and commended him for agreeing to a single term “to assuage the bitterness of the pro zoning elements”. He further stated that the president should be “encouraged to stick to the vow” although he did not elaborate on who precisely should encourage him and when this encouragement might prove necessary.



Jonathan Goodluck, then a presidential candidate seeking votes from the public was present, smiling and nodding as Obasanjo delivered his speech. It is not clear what was in his mind at the time but his silence seemed to acquiesce with the former president’s assertion that he had promised a single term. Understandably he could neither contradict nor correct him even if he had not been party to that promise. It was clearly on that premise that the Northern governors and other leaders had agreed to let him run instead of a Northern candidate according to the PDP zoning agreement. And he really wanted to be president at all costs.



Shortly after President Goodluck ran for and won the election, his aides announced a proposed constitutional amendment for a single term of 7 or 8 years which they attempted to present as a fait accompli. Nigerians were up in arms against it, clearly amazed that this issue should take precedence over every other burning issue that faced the nation at that time. They immediately recognised it for what it was, a form of term elongation and the reaction against it was so strong the presidency had to immediately tender a retraction. Nothing has been heard of it since. Was this the strategy to get around the promise of a single tenure? Other than Obasanjo’s campaign promise which is not necessarily binding on the president was there any agreement in writing or even orally that Jonathan would serve only one term?



Following the apparent moves by the president’s aides and friends to launch a campaign for Jonathan’s second term, Babangida Aliyu, governor of Niger state dropped the bombshell a few days ago that Jonathan could not run for president in 2015 since he had entered into an agreement with the governors and leaders of the PDP to serve only one term. In politics nothing really happens by chance. Babangida Aliyu did not just decide to remind Goodluck Jonathan about his alleged agreement to a single term just for the heck of it. This was a clear invitation to the Goodluck team to halt their campaign. It was a hint at the stiff opposition they can expect to face if they insist on pursuing the second term bid and it was also an indication that Babangida Aliyu was interested in the seat himself. Aliyu insists that not only did Jonathan agree to it, he also signed a document to that effect. Some other governors also claim that such a document exists and a couple have threatened to release the document at the appropriate time. But if such a document existed, would it not have been in the public domain by now?



According to Ahmed Gulak, the presidential adviser on political affairs, there was never an agreement to serve a single term. He described the claim made by Babangida Aliyu, governor of Niger state that the president had agreed to a single term as “frivolous and a figment of the governor’s imagination” and challenged anyone in possession of it to produce a copy of the document. So far no one has and it appears unlikely that there is one. Senator Kanti Bello and Senator Teslim Folarin who as PDP principal officers in the Senate attended the meeting, both said there was no written agreement. Although Folarin heard no mention whatsoever of a single term issue, Bello said Jonathan was indeed asked whether he would serve only a single term but he remained silent and did not respond. According to Bello, subsequently Governor Shema of Katsina mischeviously wrote a communiqué of the meeting and inserted an agreement to a single term.



It appears that there was no deal per se but there certainly was some sort of oral promise or understanding. Not only did Goodluck remain silent when Obasanjo promised on his behalf, he actually stated it in Ethiopia when he addressed Nigerians in diaspora after the African Summit that year. He repeated the statement again to Nigerians in Kampala, Uganda whilst expressing his regret that they would not be able to vote in the presidential elections in 2011. But so what if there was a promise or even a written and signed agreement, would it be legally binding? Most unlikely! A statement made during a casual gathering of Nigerians in diaspora can at best, if at all only be considered a vague campaign promise and acquiescence through silence during a PDP meeting could possibly pass as a “gentleman’s agreement” but neither could by any stretch of the imagination be considered legally binding. Even the purported signed agreement, if it turns out to be real cannot be enforced. No agreement can tamper with his constitutional rights and no one has the right to force him into such an agreement.



If the point of this debate is to ensure that the presidency is returned to the North, then the appropriate argument would be the PDP zoning policy which they have all admitted is still in existence. Several of the Northern PDP governors are on their second term and appear to have presidential aspirations. These include Sule Lamido (Obasanjo’s choice), Isa Yuguda who has not achieved much as a governor in his own state and Babangida Aliyu. Others from the national assembly who also seem eager to run include David Mark, Tambuwal and Bukola Saraki. Even some of the Southern governors who are on their second term are gunning for vice president roles in the event that a Northern colleague is selected to run for president. Rotimi Amaechi and Godswill Akpabio both quite suitable and rather popular come under this category. But their participation would also necessitate a change in the current zoning formula. The failure of at least one of them to secure the candidacy may cause many of these governors to decamp to the newly formed APC.



The argument for a Northern president just for the sake of it and not because the individual candidates are suitable may not go down well with the general public (not that we have much say in the matter since it is yet another PDP internal crisis) which is probably why they are holding onto the single term issue. During the last election, acrimony caused by the PDP zoning policy debate was largely responsible for the voting pattern along ethnic and religious lines. It enhanced Jonathan’s position though and will undoubtedly serve as a counter debate if the single term issue is pushed too far.



Another alternative and probably the best argument would be that which was first pointed out by former president, Ibrahim Babangida who stated that a second term would result in Jonathan being sworn in thrice and will exceed his constitutional limit of an 8 year term. Amidst arguments by legal luminaries for and against, a member of the PDP, Cyracus Njoku instituted a case in the courts to interpret the constitution and determine whether or not Jonathan could be sworn in a third time. Cyracus has asked the court to determine whether section 137(1)(b) of the constitution which provides “that a person shall not be qualified for election to the office of president if he has been elected to such office at any two previous elections” applies to the president. On the face of it that section neither excludes Jonathan’s peculiar situation nor particularly allows it. One could argue that he was not elected into that specific office until 2011. A decision has not been given on that case yet but it is expected that more suits on the same issue will be filed in due course as the battle for the most coveted seat becomes fiercer. This is just the beginning!

It is trite law dat: nemo dat quod non habet ; in pari delicto potio est conditio posidentis ;and something cannot stand on nothing.
Any bogus one-eyed or dog-eared agreement shall be vehemently resisted from being smuggled in from d window.
Any politician dat feels he commands a large followership as to run for President against GEJ shld go for it and nt resort to blackmail and cheap theatrics. They kip 4getin dat GEJ is d C-in-C and has enormous powers to blackmail and subdue his opponents.
Dat a fierce snake is sleeping does nt mean it has lost d power to bite if rudely vexed!
I hope Aliyu remembers d EFCC while sitting atop d elephants he bought with monies meant for road construction in Niger state.

The sky is wide enough for all birds to fly.