Featured
The Need To Retain Three-Term Tenure for Sports Federation Presidents

The debate over tenure limits for Presidents of Sports Federations in Nigeria has resurfaced, with some pushing for a reduction from the current three-term limit—set by the 2021 election guidelines—to just two terms.
While the call for reform may seem progressive on the surface, a deeper look reveals that maintaining the three-term structure is crucial for Nigeria’s long-term aspirations in global sports governance.
Experience and Influence Take Time
Leadership in international sports is not built overnight. Nigerian sports administrators require time to develop credibility, cultivate relationships, and gain the necessary influence to secure leadership positions at continental and global levels.
Two terms—typically spanning just eight years—are often insufficient for a federation president to make a significant mark beyond national borders. By the time they establish their presence and recognition within the African and international sports community, their tenure is nearly over, severely limiting their chances of ascending to influential global roles.
It is telling that only one Nigerian currently holds a continental sports presidency. While he is not a sitting federation president, his case is an exception rather than the norm. Strong-performing presidents, given adequate time, stand a far better chance of rising through the ranks and representing Nigeria on the global stage.
A Dubious Push for Change
Ironically, some of the loudest voices advocating for a two-term limit are individuals who previously held federation leadership positions for over 20 years. Their sudden shift in stance raises questions about the sincerity of their motives. If long tenures were beneficial during their time in office, why is it now a problem for others? This contradiction exposes a lack of moral justification for the push to shorten tenure limits.
Rather than restricting tenure, the focus should be on strengthening Nigeria’s sports electoral system. A well-structured process would ensure that non-performing presidents can be voted out, even after a single term, while high-achieving leaders are allowed to continue their impactful work.
Arbitrary tenure restrictions only serve to stifle progress and disrupt the continuity needed for meaningful international advancement.
The Risk of Weakening Nigeria’s Global Influence
Reducing the tenure limit would not only disrupt federation stability but also weaken Nigeria’s influence in world sports.
Many high-performing presidents would be cut off just as they begin to build strong international networks and gain recognition for leadership roles. This approach plays into the hands of competing nations that allow their sports administrators to rise through the ranks over extended periods, accumulating power and decision-making leverage on the world stage.
If Nigeria is serious about increasing its presence in global sports governance, we must empower our best leaders with the time and platform to compete effectively. A premature exit due to tenure restrictions only benefits our rivals while diminishing Nigeria’s standing in international sports politics.
The Way Forward: A Balanced Approach
While tenure limits should not be indefinite, a well-structured system must balance continuity with accountability. Federations with approved constitutions outlining tenure limits—whether two or three terms—should adhere strictly to their constitutional provisions. However, for federations without approved constitutions, the Ministry of Sports’ existing guideline of a three-term maximum should be upheld.
This approach ensures fairness while safeguarding Nigeria’s broader interests in global sports. Instead of imposing restrictive policies that undermine our potential, we should focus on building a transparent and effective electoral system that rewards performance, promotes stability, and secures Nigeria’s place in the corridors of international sports leadership.
Retaining the three-term tenure limit is not just about individual officeholders—it is about Nigeria’s future in global sports governance.
Business
Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Ismaila Ahmad Abdullahi Ph.D
The public hearings conducted recently by the two Chambers of the National Assembly have elicited positive responses from a broad spectrum of Nigerians, cutting across regional interest groups, government agencies, civil society groups, concerned individuals, the academia, and Labour Unions, among diverse others. Contrary to a few dissensions hitherto expressed in the media, almost all the stakeholders who spoke during the week-long sessions were unanimous in their declaration that the hallowed Chambers should pass the tax reform bills after a clean-up of the grey areas.
The public hearings were auspicious for all Nigerians desirous of economic growth and fiscal responsibility. They were also a watershed moment for the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which had been upbeat about the tax reforms. Indeed, the public hearings had rekindled hope in the tenets of democracy that guarantee freedom of expression and equitable space for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Without gainsaying the fact, the tax reform bills have been unarguably about the most thought-provoking issues in Nigeria today, drawing variegated perspectives and commentaries from even unlikely quarters such as the faith-based leaders, student bodies, and trade unions, which speaks much about the importance of the bills.
In the build-up to the public hearings, not many people believed that the bills would make it to the second reading, much less the public hearings. Even the Northern stakeholders who seemed unlikely to support the passage of the bills have softened their stance and have given valuable suggestions that would enrich the substance of the bills. The Arewa Consultative Forum came to the public hearings well-prepared with a printed booklet that addressed their concerns. It concluded with an advisory that the bills should be “Well planned, properly communicated, strategically implemented and ample dialogue and political consensus allowed for the reforms to be accepted.”
The concerns of ACF ranged from the composition of the proposed Nigeria Revenue Service Board as contained in Part 111, Section 7 of the bill, the unlimited Presidential power to exempt/wave tax payment as proposed in Section 75(1) of the bill, the family income or inheritance tax as contained in Part 1, Section 4(3) of the bill, to the issues around development levy and VAT. On the development levy, the ACF stated that unless the Federal Government is considering budgetary funding for TETFUND, NASENI and NITDA, it does not see the “wisdom behind the plan to replace (them) with NELFUND”.
The position of the North was equally reinforced by the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, Northern Elders Forum, Kano State Government, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, and the FCT Imams. Like the ACF, these stakeholders lent their respective voices to the Section on the Inheritance Tax in Part 1 of the bill and the use of the term ‘ecclesiastical’, which, in their views, undermines certain religious rights and beliefs. The Kano State Government, represented by Mahmud Sagagi, affirmed that “we support tax modernisation” but cautioned that “we must ensure that this process does not come at the expense of states’ constitutional rights and economic stability”. Professor Auwalu Yadudu, a constitutional law professor, drew attention to the use of the ‘supremacy clause’ and cautioned that the repeated use of “notwithstanding” in the bills would undermine the supremacy of the Nigerian constitution if passed as such.
Other stakeholders that made contributions at the sessions included the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Nigeria Customs Service, and a host of others. While most of their concerns bordered on technical issues requiring fine-tuning, they were unanimous in their support for the bills. They aligned with the position of the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, Ph.D. and the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, which is that the extant tax laws and fiscal regulations are obsolete necessitating reforms aimed at creating a fair and equitable tax and fiscal space to grow Nigeria’s economy.
In one of the sessions, Dr Zaach Adedeji expounded on the criss-cross of trade activities in the Free Trade Zone whereby companies misuse tax waivers as exporters to sell their goods or services in the Customs Area at an amount usually less than the price the operators in the Customs Area who pay VAT and other taxes sell theirs thereby disrupting business transactions. This way, the operators in the Free Trade Zone shortchange the government in paying their due taxes by circumventing extant regulations, which are inimical to the economy’s growth.
Overall, the presentations were forthright, foresighted, and helpful in elucidating the issues contained in the bills. According to the statistics read out at the end of the hearings at the Senate, 75 stakeholders were invited, 65 made submissions, and 61 made presentations. At the House of Representatives 53 stakeholders made presentations. By all means, this is a fair representation. Given the presentations, it is evident that the National Assembly has gathered enough materials to guide its deliberations on the bills. As we look forward to the passage of the bills, we commend the leadership of the National Assembly for their unwavering commitment to making the bills see the light of the day.
Abdullahi is the Director of the Communications and Liaison Department, FIRS.
-
Featured6 years ago
Lampard Names New Chelsea Manager
-
Featured5 years ago
FG To Extends Lockdown In FCT, Lagos Ogun states For 7days
-
Featured6 years ago
NYSC Dismisses Report Of DG’s Plan To Islamize Benue Orientation Camp
-
Featured5 years ago
Children Custody: Court Adjourns Mike Ezuruonye, Wife’s Case To April 7
-
Featured3 years ago
Transfer Saga: How Mikel Obi Refused to compensate me After I Linked Him Worth $4m Deal In Kuwait SC – Okafor
-
Sports2 years ago
TINUBU LAMBAST DELE MOMODU
-
News3 months ago
Zulu to Super Eagles B team, President Tinubu is happy with you
-
Featured5 years ago
Board urges FG to establish one-stop rehabilitation centres in 6 geopolitical zones