By Kunle Odusola-Stevenson
In the unfolding political theatre of Ondo State, a constitutional cloud is gathering with growing speculation that Governor Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa may be weighing a bid for another full term after completing the unexpired tenure of his late predecessor, Governor Rotimi Akeredolu. Such ambition, if pursued, will not merely test the elasticity of political loyalty but also the integrity of Nigeria’s constitutional architecture, particularly in light of the 2018 constitutional amendment signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari.
At the heart of this unfolding drama lies Sections 137(3) and 182(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as altered by the Fourth Alteration Act No. 16 of 2018. These sections were introduced to check the extended tenure of vice presidents or deputy governors who ascend to power mid-term and then seek to run for office twice more. The law was a direct response to the Goodluck Jonathan era, in which a Vice President completed a predecessor’s term and still contested for the presidency in two subsequent elections—ultimately spending over eight years in office.
The amendment now states unequivocally:
“A person who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as President or Governor shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term.”
The intent of the amendment was crystal clear: to prevent political actors from stretching constitutional term limits by using technical succession loopholes. It recognizes the equity of rotation and the moral limits of incumbency. Therefore, any attempt to amend this provision to benefit a sitting governor or president—especially for personal political gain—raises constitutional, ethical, and democratic red flags.
In Governor Aiyedatiwa’s case, the circumstances of his ascension are well known. He was sworn in to complete the tenure of Governor Akeredolu, who tragically passed away mid-term. His subsequent electoral victory in 2024 was meant to stabilize the state and reflect the good faith of continuity. But if current speculations are true—that the governor may be nudging constitutional reform in Abuja to facilitate another shot at the ballot post-2028—it calls for rigorous scrutiny.
The argument here is not about ambition—every politician is entitled to it. It is about constitutionalism, national precedent, and respect for political covenants. The North-Central bloc of Ondo State, it is said, supported Governor Aiyedatiwa on the understanding that Ilaje would serve a transitional five-year period. To renege on this gentlemanly understanding not only destabilizes the fragile regional equilibrium within the state but also puts at risk the trust and moral capital already invested in the current administration.
More so, sidelining core actors from the former administration—particularly Ondo Central politicians who stood by Governor Aiyedatiwa in his hour of greatest political need—may not be accidental. It could be interpreted as a deliberate strategy to weaken potential internal opposition ahead of a controversial constitutional maneuver. If so, it adds a layer of political calculation that calls into question the governor’s commitment to collective leadership and equitable power sharing.
In a democracy, laws are meant to serve the people, not be adjusted mid-game to favour a player. Any conversation about extending term limits—especially by a beneficiary of constitutional succession—must be approached with the highest regard for legal integrity, political memory, and the will of the people.
Let us be clear: Section 182(3) of the Constitution, as amended in 2018, bars a deputy governor who has completed a predecessor’s term from seeking election more than once. That is the law as it stands. For any change to occur, it must go through the arduous process of constitutional amendment—requiring the consent of the National Assembly, two-thirds of State Houses of Assembly, and, ultimately, the court of public opinion.
The question now is not whether the governor can attempt this—but whether he should.
History rarely forgets those who exploit silence and sycophancy to bend constitutional order for personal gain. But it also honours those who, when tempted by power, chose instead to uphold the rule of law and strengthen democratic values. Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa still has time to choose which legacy he wishes to leave behind.
*Kunle Odusola-Stevenson writes from Lagos
