A continent of young people is still wary of ‘third presidential terms’

Read: Africa and the never ending debate of ‘life presidents'

“Senegal is more than me, and is full of capable leaders for the country’s development,” he said.

His political opponents claimed victory, saying he had bowed to “people’s pressure”.

The question of the lengthy of presidential terms in Africa continues to provide insight into the context in which it is raised.

While in some cases the answers are the same, the reasons for opposing or supporting term limits might vary significantly from one country to another country.

In Senegal, the president seemed to acknowledge that going for another term could potentially tear his country apart.

He should know, after all his own election victory came on the backdrop of months of violence and protests against his predecessor who had attempted to extend his time in office, only to be denied at the ballot box.

In The Gambia, a country Senegal surrounds almost entirely, lawmakers rejected a proposal to impose presidential term limits but the reasons were not about giving the incumbent infinite time in office but over fears that, like other presidents on the continent, he might use the changed constitution to reset the clock on his own time in office.

Debates about presidential term limits have come to centre on two things: the individual in charge of the country and the country’s political and historical context. Long term presidents cast long shadows.

The generation of leaders which brought political independence did not have to worry about their time in office coming to an end through ballot boxes.

They worried about guns; whether it was military coups or an armed rebellion. Some were toppled, some survived, and some were assassinated.

There were some who were toppled but survived long enough to mount political comebacks.

Very few were defeated in multiparty elections. And equally few retired voluntarily at a time when that was not a fashionable thing to do. That means the exit of many of these first generation of independence leaders was chaotic or bloody.

With fears of creating other centres of power, many of their deputies or potential rivals for power doomed.

The horrors the ruled endured at many of the ‘life term’ presidents and the instability, coupled with uncertainty their time in office brought to the lives of ordinary people informed many countries’ attempts of limiting the time which their presidents could stay in office. It is a fact that Africa there cannot be a single solution to Africa’s governance issues.

However, it is also a fact that countries which have been served well with long term presidents are a rarity.

Even in such cases, there are too many question marks on the sustainability of the work the ‘big man’ has done once he is out, especially if the grave suddenly comes calling.

There have been countries which unravelled after the death of a long term ruler, despite the veneer of stability. Presidential term limits have their challenges not least the ritual of elections which rarely deliver the people’s expectations.

In most cases elections have come to be more about powerful Western countries and their financial muscles and not about the voters.

Some of the longest serving presidents on the continent have perfected the art of playing to this audience, which guarantees them legal legitimacy even though their political currency has long been worthless. In part, this explains why a continent with one of the youngest populations in the world is mostly ruled by old men or that they have better luck with voters.

Limiting the time which presidents can serve in office in a continent still dealing with delivering basic needs more than six decades later after political independence is important to guarantee stability and development.

With term limits, voters can be sure of a rotating cast of characters after every few years and has so far worked in many countries compared to the alternative which would require an entire country to turn into Nostradamus.