By Charles Pemu 
Prominent human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has condemned the ongoing political discourse around single-term presidency, describing it as a distraction from Nigeria’s deep-seated national problems.
Speaking on Politics Today, a Channels Television programme aired on Monday, Falana criticized the emerging campaign trail narratives ahead of the 2027 elections, particularly those framing a four-year single-term presidency as a political strategy or power-balancing tool.
“I will not participate in any campaign for a power shift, or arguments about which region or religious group should hold the presidency for four or eight years. That is purely diversionary,” Falana stated firmly.
He argued that conversations around term limits, zoning, and sectional entitlement do little to confront the urgent crises facing Nigerians—rampant insecurity, poverty, hunger, and failing infrastructure.
“You insult the intelligence of the Nigerian people when political discourse is reduced to elite negotiations over how power should be shared, who should govern, and from where,” he said. “For goodness’ sake, can we focus on those with actual solutions to Nigeria’s worsening problems?”
Falana reminded politicians and political parties of their constitutional obligations under Section 224 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates that their objectives must align with the country’s fundamental policy goals. Citing Section 14, he noted that the security and welfare of the people must remain the primary purpose of government.
“We must begin to address the real issues,” he stressed. “Nigeria’s power sector, for instance, remains a critical failure. Without stable electricity, industrialisation will continue to elude us.”
The legal luminary’s intervention comes in response to the recent position of Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi, who reaffirmed his promise to serve only a single four-year term if elected in 2027. Obi defended the pledge as a commitment to equity and national cohesion, citing Nigeria’s informal power rotation arrangement between the North and South.
However, Falana’s remarks suggest that such political commitments, while perhaps well-intentioned, risk overshadowing the more urgent question: who has the vision, capacity, and will to confront Nigeria’s existential challenges?