AP® Comparative Government and Politics · Unit 2 · Topic 2.4
Executive Term Limits Compared
A term limit sets the maximum number of terms an executive can serve, forcing turnover even for a popular leader. The six course countries set this rule very differently, and the limit itself says nothing about whether the elections behind it are actually free.
Term limits exist because democracies fear concentrated power more than they value a good leader staying put. Even a popular, competent executive can use incumbency to bend courts, media, and party structures in their favor over time. A fixed exit date forces regular turnover, keeps rivals within the ruling party hopeful enough to stay loyal rather than rebel, and signals to voters that no single person is permanently entitled to the office.
The limit also reshapes behavior inside a term. In year one, a first-term executive facing re-election still answers to voters and moderates decisions accordingly. In the final, unrenewable term, that leverage disappears. This is the lame-duck effect: with no next election to fear, a leader can pursue unpopular or self-serving policies, reward loyalists, or even try to rewrite the constitution to extend their own stay, since the normal electoral punishment no longer applies.
Across the six countries the rules vary sharply. The United Kingdom's prime minister has no term limit at all, constrained only by needing the confidence of Parliament. Mexico's president serves one six-year term, no re-election ever. Nigeria limits its president to two four-year terms, eight years total. Russia officially limits its president to two consecutive terms, but constitutional changes reset that count. China removed its two-term limit on the presidency in 2018. Iran's president is limited to two four-year terms. This variation connects directly to the unit's bigger question: a formal rule on paper tells you little about whether power actually changes hands, which depends on whether courts and elections enforce that rule.
Key terms
- Term limit
- A constitutional rule capping the number of terms an executive may serve in office.
- Lame duck
- An executive in a final term who faces no re-election and so has weaker incentive to answer to voters.
- Incumbency advantage
- The edge a sitting executive holds over challengers through visibility, resources, and control of state institutions.
- Constitutional amendment
- A formal change to a constitution's text, sometimes used to reset or remove existing term limits.
Watch it explained
- How it worksHow does a term limit change what a leader chooses to do in year one versus year five?
- Worked exampleShow me the term limits for the executive in all six course countries on one timeline.
- Going furtherWhat happens to accountability during a leader's final unrenewable term?
- Common mistakeWhy isn't a term limit automatically a sign of a healthy democracy?
Check yourself
End of topic.