As our law makers go through the process of constitutional review aimed at amending article 101 (and others that are out of touch with our realities) so as to sustain the exemplary social transformation the leadership of President Paul Kagame has derived to our country, there are mixed reactions as to how many terms we should settle for as a people. My simple survey has revealed a few options suggested by various Rwandese for various reasons.
{{Options Suggested:}}
The first suggestion is a two seven years terms limit. They are some Rwandese who believe that, two terms would enable President Paul Kagame to consolidate the gains he has derived to our country and that after that a successor would then be found to carry the button and move our transformation forward.
They are yet others who view the change as function not only for social economic transformation but also of ensuring sustained reconciliation that is as of now is work-in-progress and too fragile to gamble with. Those who belong to this school of thought also believe that, the same applied to our security panorama which is so dynamic that, there are serious threats that we as country will have to contend with in the long haul especially FDLR and their Tutsi extermination ideology that is easy to sell if left unchecked.
These Rwandese then argue that, only President Kagame has been certified by all measures to face these, and contain them. These argue that, three seven years terms would most probably be sufficient to enable President Paul Kagame mentor a capable heir apparent who can carry his mantle.
These point out that, he is after all young at 57 and another x3x7 will see him at his 78 years of age. These have confided that, oldies and extremists who have drank ethnicity which to them is a creed/faith will be too old to influence what happens in our country as far as our reconciliation and through this security threats to our country are concerned .
{{
Request Stage.}}
As it is now, President Kagame has not even acceptable our request to run come 2017. We are still at the request stage. At such stage, we can’t request him to stand in 2017, and at the same time give him time/term limits when he should end his rule. This approach would be counterproductive in my opinion. Let us for the sake of argument assume that, Rwandese will settle for one term of 7 years.
Would that be acceptable to him? I personally doubt whether such will be acceptable. At the request stage, what is rational is not to subject The President to subjective limits, but rather to leave him to decide how long he can keep on with his exemplary transformation agenda at work.
We would rather leave him to decide when it is viable for change. He is the only one of us who knows our abnormal Rwanda better than all of us. He like most of us lived the abnormal Rwanda as a refugee of rejection by his own country for who was rather than what he did. He is the one who through heroism defeated indomitable combined force of Rwanda ex-far, and their French military and financial mighty than only those with spiritual hope would have believed. He has turned around this abnormal Rwanda to seemingly normal Rwanda that is too early to celebrate. He drafted all models of our transformation that has worked exemplary beyond remotest imagination in the shortest time possible in the history of a post conflict country, much more so a post genocide country.
In my opinion, he is the only one of us who knows better when his models are in a stable and sustainable mode to the extent that he can pass on the button to the next leader without awakening the ghosts of abnormal Rwanda. The rest will indulge in guess estimate as to when he should retire.
Moreover, we also have to take into account the fact that, such exemplary leaders emerge once in the life time of a nation and limiting such leader through terms is irrational and a dis-service to our country with serious ramifications we can’t afford to underwrite nor discount as a country, which is why we shall need to engage our national soul searching to arrive at the best scenario for our country.
Mine, and one informed by his extremely rare leadership virtues and values that changed our country miraculously is no limit at all. I personally has zero fears of some who argue that, he will stick to power for life if we take this route. Zero! Absolutely zero.
History will judge me for this. He will pass on power (if he accepts our request) at such point in time when he is sure his legacy can’t be reversed through change of leadership. This is the time when all he delivered to our country in form socio economic transformation is in a sustainable mode. He is the only one who knows when.
{{Sustainability is time invariant.}}
As I pointed earlier in these series, sustainability of social economic transformation depends not so much on the time we can set for our President, but rather on many socio-economic variables that are time invariant. They can take a few years as they can be attained in the long term. For instance our national reconciliation will take many centuries to usher into irreversible/sustainable mode. Research has indicated a minimum of three centuries which is equally true for social economic transformations (other things being equal). And so in my opinion (and this true to a number of Rwandese I have surveyed), it is in our best interest as country to open our constitution and peg the term of our leadership to delivery rather than term limits.
If we are opening the same for the exemplary leadership of President Paul Kagame to bear us more of ingenious deliverables that has seen our country rise from ashes in 1994, to an example of the fastest growing economies today, then our objective should remain sustenance of exemplary delivery rather than term limits as if these are an end in themselves. We have an opportunity to define our political set-up so as to peg it to socio-economic delivery of our leaders which is true to such countries as The UK, German, and Netherlands etc, whose leaders remain in office as long they deliver to the expectations of electorate. Ours being in the development phase we are, and unique context we are face, term limits will defeat the purpose. We can’t afford other narratives that don’t answer to our context.
A context that President Kagame has managed in such a heroic way unimaginable and one, we can’t afford to limit his heroism. It will be an insult to all that he has done/ delivered to his country and our country. Leaving his exemplary leadership open is the most logical thing to do, the rest would be construed as unappreciative or given, or even a country with a short memory of itself all of which would be unfortunate to say the least.
{ {{To be continued…}} }
{Professor Nshuti Manasseh
An Economist and A financial Expert.
Email:nshutim[at]gmail.com}
Leave a Reply