Advantages in setting term limits
Published on: Sunday, March 13, 2016
Text Size:
IT is time for Malaysia to seriously consider limiting the terms in office for top political posts.
Ideally, it should be limited to two terms only.
Limiting the terms in office for politicians provide constant opportunities for the evolution of new ideas and new ways of doing things for we know that every person has different level of intellectuality and moral values.
With that, obsolete, unproductive and destructive ideas can always be discarded. Jokers too can be avoided.
And I am sure that new, productive and constructive ideas can always be put in place.
Term limits disallow monopoly. People believe that there needs to be an infusion of fresh blood periodically to curb wastage spending. Having the same old leaders with the same old style of thinking and the same old style of doing things won’t help a country progress. We need leaders who can match their prowess of thoughts with the continuous and ever changing demands of the society today.
It is disappointing that while the people are getting mature, the leaders are showing opposite attitudes.
The people want to hear brilliant ideas from leaders but alas we are often presented with uninspiring statements.
Most are lacking the quality the people hope for as a true leader – knowledgeable, brilliant thinker, excellent inspirer and morally honourable. So how can the people trust such leaders?
Yes, limiting the terms in office enables a promotion of leaders who could be great thinkers, excellent initiator of ideas and exceptional talent of transforming half-opportunity into great achievements. Leaders who can’t think great, who are unable to create ideas are not leaders but followers. They are a burden to a country and her people.
Their wages will only cause wastage of public funds.
Their contributions are often insignificant and valueless. They can only be aptly labelled as endorsers of other leaders’ thoughts.
Great leaders must be those responsible leaders void of corrupt minds and deeds.
Limiting a leader’s tenure in office allows constant monitoring of corrupt practises. The checks and balances can easily be traced during or after the take-over. It reminds leaders not to easily manipulate and abuse his power because of his limited time in power, unlike when a leader knows that his tenure in a political job he helms is limitless. If he can live more than 100 years, he will do so to stay if he can buy the support he wants from his supporters. Isn’t cash a king?
When a leader’s tenure in office is limitless, there is a tendency that his focus will shift to maintaining his rule of power for himself only. Once this focus is established, he is likely transforming himself into a dictator.
His concern is the survival of his power. He will try to stay until he dies. The law of a country will no longer important to him but he will use it to impede all his political distracters. The consequence will be the promotion of backwardness, not progression.
Too long holding certain political post will certainly invite abuses of power. We cannot deny that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Research has also proved that the more powerful a person is the more corrupt he is.
The devastation it inflicted on a country’s economy will directly destroy the stability of the people’s livelihood.
Once a dictatorial or an abusive leader is in control of a country, he will no longer care about his morality.
He will become shameless, thick faced. What more if he knows that he has abused his powers. Of course, he will stay on so that all his misdeeds will not be known. He will no longer care if a country he rules is having a disastrous economy.
His only concern is to retain his power. He will be ready to die in the post he is holding because when he dies, all his wrong-doing will be forgotten and that he will not have to face shame during his life time.
The attraction of power remains a strong motivating factor for many leaders. In African countries where corrupt leaders are mostly found, the introduction of new constitutions that limit the president’s tenure in office with a two-term limit had not deterred abuses of power but at least had curbed the continuous abuses of power.
Though the terms in office is constitutionally limited, there are attempts to maintain power via back-door strategy.
They hand-pick a docile successor and remain as chairman of the country’s dominant party.
The reason being is the leaders are fearful of being prosecuted for corruption.
It is also related to human right abuses and the lack of opportunities and the loss of connections and privileges.
It has been researched that the tenure extension can create arbitrary and violent rule, often associated with lifelong presidencies.
The importance of term limits stems from its positive impact on power alternation which in turn contributes to democratic consolidation.
Term limits offer a periodic guarantee of personal change. It is a known fact that prolonged time in office allows greater centralisation and personalisation of power, and deeper entrenchment of informal patronage networks.
Unlimited tenure creates accountability deficit increasing corruption. Term limits also enhance power contestation in a non-violent manner.
Term limits is important for two reasons. Firstly, to adhere to term limits contribute to essential change.
Leaders who observed constitutional term limits find it difficult for future third-term attempts.
Secondly, it provides opportunities for retired leaders to greatly involve in civil society and the public.
Malaysia needs to change and that change must be in totality if we still aspire to be a developed country.
The present political scenario is not the kind of environment that Malaysians are looking for.
It voids the right values for our country to be able to compete competitively in the global arena.
What more with our present tainted reputation. Therefore, we must start seeking for alternatives.
That alternative is limiting the terms in office for all political important posts. Who knows, with that change our leaders will become more responsible and accountable because they know that they have to prove their true worthiness during that limited time.
Limitation of power can also be manifested on “expired” political leaders. When we say “expired,” we refer to their outdated political thoughts. Their ideas are already out of sync with the current needs of the society. The energy they have is greatly weakened.
With such negative attributes, his regression of thoughts will lead to the implementation of unrealistic and wrong needs; his ideas are outdated and cannot be implemented. On top of that, he will no longer be able to provide on the ground service, the “turun padang.” So when this happens, he must willingly surrender his political baton to others to avoid further damages to his weak reputation.
Simon Sinek, an English author, once said, “If you want to be a great leader, remember to treat all people with respect at all times. For one, because you never know when you’ll need their help. And two, because it is a sign you respect people, which all great leaders do.”
Indeed, respect can also be related to limiting ones political tenure. Why I said so? It is due to the fact that once a leader outlived his political usage, he must not force himself to stay longer. He must make a choice and that choice is to end his political tenure.
This way, he is respecting the people’s future rather than his political needs. If he makes a decision after being cursed by the people he represented, then that is tantamount to disrespecting his people. That definitely eliminated him as a great leader.
Progress means we must change for the better. Limiting terms in office allows systematic transaction of power.
With a two-term opportunity, any leader will surely try to outdo his predecessor and this can create a healthy competition.
Just remember, a leader who holds the top post of a country for unlimited terms will not like others to be his challenger.
A clash of interest will always prevail.
We must accept the fact that the present political squabbling is closely related to the limitless tenure of our country’s top post. If there is a limitation of tenure, no leader will risk the people’s needs to stay longer in that coveted post.
Therefore, such practise must be changed. It is time for law makers to really consider proposing a new law that prohibits any leader to hold the country’s top post more than two terms.
I believe many good things will prevail if such proposal is approved in the legislative assembly, Parliament.
But will our political leaders see the goodness of such proposal? As an ordinary Malaysian, I strongly feel that the proposal will receive strong objections from those who cannot see the benefit of term limits for that important post.
Term limits play an important role in a democratic polity, and their extensions are undesirable.
It will serve as an increasingly significant reference point for responsible leadership, which includes timely departure from power.
ADVERTISEMENT
