The Third Tenure Syndrome: A Threat to Democratic Balance in Owan Politics

 

The Third Tenure Syndrome: A Threat to Democratic Balance in Owan Politics

In every thriving democracy, the strength of its institutions is measured not just by the ability to win elections, but by the willingness to respect agreements, uphold fairness, and promote equitable power rotation. In Owan politics, a troubling pattern is beginning to emerge—what can best be described as the “Third Tenure Syndrome.”

This phenomenon reflects a growing tendency among political actors to overstay their welcome in positions of power, often at the expense of established understandings and the collective will of the people. At the center of this unfolding debate is Julius Ihonvbere, whose reported interest in seeking a third tenure has sparked concern across the Owan constituency.

For years, there has been a widely acknowledged political understanding within the Owan bloc: a two-term limit that allows for fairness, inclusion, and the opportunity for fresh leadership. This informal yet respected arrangement has helped maintain balance between the different interests within the constituency. It has also served as a stabilizing mechanism in a political environment that is often fraught with competition and distrust.

However, any attempt to extend beyond this agreed tenure raises serious questions about commitment to collective agreements. It introduces the risk of political dominance by a single figure or group, undermining the spirit of rotation that ensures all stakeholders feel represented. When such agreements are broken, it sends a dangerous message—that political convenience outweighs integrity.

Critics argue that after two tenures marked by what they describe as unfulfilled promises to the Owan people, the push for another term reflects not service, but self-preservation. The argument is not merely about an individual, but about a broader culture in Nigerian politics where power is often held onto rather than handed over.

Psychologically, the “Third Tenure Syndrome” can be interpreted as a reluctance to relinquish control—a pattern rooted in the high-stakes, winner-takes-all nature of politics in Nigeria. Leaders, once entrenched, may find it difficult to step aside, especially in systems where political office is closely tied to influence and survival.

Yet, the long-term consequences of this pattern are profound. It discourages emerging leaders, breeds resentment among marginalized groups, and weakens democratic norms. More importantly, it erodes trust—the very foundation upon which political legitimacy is built.

For the Owan people, this moment presents a critical choice. It is a test of whether established agreements will be upheld or discarded. It is also an opportunity to reaffirm a commitment to fairness, accountability, and the principle that leadership is a privilege, not a possession.

Democracy thrives when leaders know when to step forward—and when to step aside. The preservation of unity and stability in Owan land may very well depend on making the right decision at this pivotal time.

Hon Daniel Asekhame