In most parts of the world, the constitution specifies the age, term, and the number of times a president can be elected. However, once elected, many presidents dream of remaining in power all their lives and seek out every way to do so. The most popular and classic trick is organizing a referendum to change the constitutional amendment regarding presidents to their advantage. It also includes removing the re-election clause, the extension of the term of office, and the possibility of re-nomination as circumstances change.
What problems can arise when an individual stays in power for decades, or even his whole life? Why shouldn’t the head of state have that position for more than one term?
Head of state for life
The prime examples are right next door. Last year, both our neighbors rushed to amend their constitution to guarantee the legal environment for their heads of state to stay in power for life.
The 2020 amendment to the Russian constitution allowed Vladimir Putin to stay as president till 2036 until the age of 84, potentially serving as the head of state for 36 years. Furthermore the previous limit for tenure was canceled, hence enabling Putin to run in the 2024 presidential election. The new constitution granted a life-long immunity to him as well. The previous record for the country was held by the 30-year rule of the Generalissimus J. Stalin.
Meanwhile in China, the constitutional article limiting the leader’s rule to two terms, which came into effect in 1980, was canceled by the Chinese Parliament in 2020 and paved the way for 67-year-old Xi Jinping who became president in 2013, to keep his position for life. The previous record-holder was Mao Zedong, the Great Helmsman, who ruled China for 33 years.
In the 2020 amendment to the Mongolian constitution, the term of office for president has been changed from a maximum of two consecutive four-year terms to a six-year term. Recently, a strong debate stirred up in our society on whether our current president can run for office in the election next summer. Mongolia’s leadership record belongs to Marshall Yu. Tsedenbal who ruled the country for 44 years.
Please read the similar story of how the long-ruling president of Azerbaijan, Aliyev, has made his wife his Vice President.
Uganda held presidential elections last week. The 76-year-old President Y. Museveni, who has ruled the country of 42 million people for 35 consecutive years since 1986, won the election with 58.8% of the votes. Meanwhile, 34.2% of the votes went to his main opponent, 38-year-old pop musician Bobby Vine. Vine did not accept the election results and claimed to have won by a clear margin. He also said that the incidents, including pre-filling and sealing of ballots, assault on his representatives, and expulsion from polling stations, will be shown when the Internet reopens. During Uganda’s presidential campaigns, the government cracked down on opposition with arrests, controlled the media, and killed at least 54 people. The Internet was shut down across the country three days before the election. Police and soldiers patrolled the streets, enforcing a COVID curfew and send warnings not to protest against the election results. General Museveni has held referendums twice before to amend the Constitution for allowing the president to be re-elected as many times as he wants and removing the 75-year age limit.
Similar trends can be observed in many African nations such as Rwanda, Togo, Gabon, Chad, Cameroon, The Congo Republic, Sudan, Eritrea, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Only the former President Nelson Mandela of South Africa had served one term of office as he promised and refused to re-run despite public demands.
Reason and results
The reason for leaders to cling to their power is to avoid being persecuted for the crimes they committed, keep their wealth acquired through power, and prevent retaliation by their enemies.
Just like every king’s reign comes to an end, it is inevitable that those leaders who ruled for decades will withdraw one day. Only a few leave legitimately, for example, with a transfer of power through elections or voluntarily. In contrast, most of them leave forcibly through illegitimate means such as revolutions, military coups, riots, and uprisings. Statistically, the more a leader tries to stay in power, the more likely they will leave illegitimately. In other words, clinging onto their seat lessens their likelihood of retiring peacefully. How a ruler leaves illegitimately depends on how many mistakes they made during their life-long rule. Once they pass a turning point, there is no chance to leave legitimately.
The longer a person stays in power, the more likely it is that another dictator will replace him. This is because a person who has been a leader for a long time manages to completely remove all his rivals from the political arena, so a competent rival cannot emerge. It also means that society has accepted the dictator’s rule for decades. This can be linked mainly to the politicians being able to stir up upheaval in the country’s civil society and manipulate them.
In the systems established by “eternal” presidents, all decisions are made only based on his will, and all state power is concentrated in his hands. This leads to the absence of responsibility in government institutions and horizontal administration, with everyone avoiding bearing any form of responsibility. Over time, citizens become convinced that nothing depends on them. Once a society turns into this state, it will take many years to completely change the already established governance model because time is needed for the society to mature on its own.
Term limits for presidents are useful in preventing an individual from using the governmental instruments to sabotage the power distribution while also encouraging them to live up to their promises and leaving a fair legacy and history. A legitimate transfer of power eliminates the risk of destruction in the state system by coups or uprisings incited by rivalry. Limiting the term of office also enables preparing a new generation of political leaders and implementing new ideas and policies. No leadership is unchangeable no matter how great, reputable, powerful, or famous.
2021.01.20
Trans. by Riya.T and Munkh-Erdene.D