MARCH 18 — This year is the 74th anniversary of the 22nd Amendment, amendment (1951) to the Constitution of the United States effectively limiting to two the number of terms a president of the United States may serve.
The amendment to the US Constitution was one of 273 recommendations to the US Congress by the Hoover Commission, created by President Harry S. Truman, to reorganise and reform the federal government. It was formally proposed by the US Congress on March 24, 1947, and was ratified on February 27, 1951.
This year is also the 26th anniversary of neighbouring Indonesia adopting the model of only allowing two consecutive five-year presidential terms in 1999 after long-time autocrat Suharto had fallen amidst mass protest.
Suharto had served as president after election for seven terms between 1968 and 1998, using the absence of term limits in the republic’s original 1945 Constitution.
Prior to Suharto, founding president Sukarno had also stayed in power until being removed by force. Sukarno had himself declared president for life in 1963, but lost power in 1965 as a result of the escalating tensions between the army and the communist party.
In the late 1990s, as the country was engulfed in “reformasi” cries, the younger leaders were not unaware that there had been only two presidents in 53 years, both of whom had stayed in power for so long that ultimately, they were toppled from it.
On Monday, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim urged critics of the proposal to limit the prime minister’s tenure to a maximum of 10 years not to turn the issue into racial politics. — Picture by Raymond Manuel
It became a “strategic priority” to draft amendments to the 1945 Constitution to provide for presidential term limits. Indeed, the term limit stipulations were among the first constitutional amendments passed in 1999. (Marcus Mietzn and Jun Honna, “Elite opposition and popular rejection: the failure of presidential term limit evasion in Widodo’s Indonesia”, South East Asia Research 2023, Vol. 31, No. 2, 115–131)
South Korea has not two, but one term of office for its president. The single five-year term limit is among the shortest office terms for an elected head of government. (Fiona Yap, “Term Limits in South Korea: Promises and Perils”, in Alexander Baturo, and Robert Elgie (eds), The Politics of Presidential Term Limits (Oxford, 2019; online edn, Oxford Academic, 22 Aug. 2019)
There are pros and cons of term limits for an elected head of government – be it a president or prime minister.
On Monday (March 17), Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim urged critics of the proposal to limit the prime minister’s tenure to a maximum of 10 years not to turn the issue into racial politics.
“The prime minister reminded certain parties from the opposition bloc not to politicise this noble intention by turning it into narrow and shallow racial politics,” said Anwar’s senior press secretary Tunku Nashrul Abaidah.
“Limiting the prime minister’s tenure is not a new idea. In fact, some of our neighbouring countries, such as Indonesia, have already implemented this approach.”
“This is a step to ensure the continuity of a clean administration, a more structured system, and to prevent the centralisation of power that could potentially lead to corruption and abuse of power,” he further said in a livestream.
The prime minister has called for the proposal to be debated constructively and responsibly, taking into account future challenges while encouraging all parties to contribute their input towards creating a transparent and fair system.
So, if you see the cons of the proposal, put forward your arguments in the best manner.
If you are a Muslim, it will be in line with the command of the Qur’an: وَجَادِلْهُم بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ (wa jadilhum bil-lati hiya ahsan). And argue with them in the best manner (Chapter 16, verse 125).
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
