“We pay a price when special interests win out over the collective national interest.” — Chris Christie
What is national interest? This question becomes necessary for this week in the light of the former leader of the nation’s parliament, Senator Ahmad Lawan’s well-publicised remarks in the national news media. He was reported as saying that every action and inaction of the nation’s parliament in the last four years were in the national interest. Did he mean that all they did or didn’t do was in the interest of the nation?
The statement sounded patriotic and genuine on the surface but duplicitous when you toothcomb the activities of the 9th National Assembly, especially looking at the classic role of the parliament in a constitutional democracy. The primary function of any parliament is to represent the people. In other words, MPs stand in the gap as the voice of the people, making laws for good governance and overseeing and checkmating the executive arm of government. That will ensure that laws made by the MPs are followed in the interest of the people. In Nigeria, this aspect of lawmaking is popularly called the oversight function.
There is this old-school song by an Igbo minstrel, Celestine Ukwu, which says that everybody claims to hold the ọfọ (symbol of rectitude) but only the ọfọ truly knows who is upright.
In this country today, it has become impossible to determine who and what is right because righteousness has been massively contaminated to the point that it is hard to identify, even with a microscope.
This contamination has become the bane of what is known worldwide as national interest. It has become a blanket to cover for our inability to strike a balance in governance delivery. It has become a camouflage for injustice in our service to the people.
What is this so-called national interest? A Google search shows it as a sovereign state’s goals and ambitions, particularly in the economic, military, cultural areas or otherwise, and often taken to be the aim of the government.
Liberal scholars see national interest as an aggregation of the preferences of domestic political groups. Constructivist scholars reject that the national interest of states is static and can be assumed a priori; rather, they argue, the preferences of states are shaped through social interactions and are changeable. National interest is also explained in elementary terms as the interest of a nation as a whole held to be an independent entity separate from the interests of subordinate areas or groups.
In a democratic setting, the two biggest issues germane to national interest are transparency in government and in the electoral process. The critical importance of national interest in a country is underscored by the fact that the government should take tough decisions even if they hurt the people, provided it is in the national interest. In our case, for instance, the fuel subsidy removal is one. But national interest requires such a government to mete out stiffer sanctions/decisions on the few corrupt leeches who corruptly benefit from the so-called subsidy while it lasted against the national interest.
In Nigeria, tough decisions that hurt the masses more and are easily taken. Successive administrations have always shied away from tough decisions that tackle the glaring disservice of the ruling elite. National interest suffers when those who undermine it are made to walk away under the cover of other subordinate interests.
In this country when anybody–government officials, legislators, labour unions, and others– tell you that the action they are taking is in the national interest, just adjust yourself and look underneath, something is stuffed for them under the bed.
In this clime, we equate national interest with the predilections and idiosyncracies of the political authorities. The same thing goes with when they have no personal stakes. This is wrong because the people’s interest should be the overriding stake.
It is laughable to hear Sen. Lawan claim that the 9th Senate, which he superintended over, performed or did not in the national interest. If national interest is what is as defined above, Sen. Lawan must be speaking to the Marines. Under his watch as Seate president, Nigeria witnessed the most biased, narrow, and divisive administration, yet the MPs did nothing to stem the tide; instead, they danced along in praise-singing to the perpetrator of ignoble governance. Under Lawan’s watchdog role as super legislator, the country witnessed the worst election management in Nigeria’s history.
As the head of the federal legislature, what example did Lawan show, wanting to be the President and Senator at the same time and arm-twisting the judiciary to favour him? Where did he place national interest when he decided to present himself for the presidential race when his party had decided that for national interest, after eight years of a northerner as President power should return to the South?
Where were Lawan and his selfish colleagues when the constitution of Nigeria was flagrantly breached in the federal character principles and code of conduct in the lopsided appointments in virtually all sectors? Where was Lawan when a critical section of this country cried for eight years of being sidelined in the military and para-military agencies? Where was national interest when the biggest corporate institution, the NNPC, had virtually all its top positions occupied by a section of this country?
Where were Lawan and the National Assembly when there was no passable road in the economic hub of the South? His parliament approved an expressway and a rail line to Niger Republic as a priority?
How was national interest served in the several cases of budget padding of the 9th assembly? Which national interest was Lawan and the 9th Assembly serving when they indiscriminately approved loans for the presidency even on the eve of their departure? One would have expected Lawan to tell Nigerians and the global democratic community that through their actions (law-making and oversight functions), the 9th National Assembly was able to block loopholes and reduce corruption in various government departments and agencies.
As we all knew and saw, the MPs were accomplices to corruption and nepotism committed in these areas. The man who did the country 419 with Nigeria Air, former Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika, defending his fraud, said the legislators demanded a bribe. Possibly, the bribe was in the national interest.
As copiously demonstrated in the last eight years under Muhammadu Buhari and the likes of Ahmad Lawan, Nigeria’s national interest is predetermined by geopolitics or history. We all watched how, under Buhari’s watch, the national interest was jettisoned, for parochial considerations. Those, as the MPs, who should checkmate him played along, eulogizing the perpetrator as a hero. It’s disgusting that our lawmakers have been dodging and fibbing in the national interest and are not even ashamed of their acts. No wonder American social commentator Thomas Sowell remarked, “Politics is the art of making your selfish desires seem like the national interest.”
If patriotism is when the love of your people comes first and nationalism is when hate for people other than your own comes first, where did the MPs of the 9th NASS fit in? What a lesson for the 10th NASS. God help us.