Across Nigeria’s political landscape, legislative offices — from local government councils to the National Assembly — are increasingly judged by the volume of handouts, not the quality of legislative work. The public has been conditioned to celebrate transformers over transparency, and food donations over functional laws. This represents a worrying drift from the true purpose of legislative institutions.
The word “Legislature” is derived from Latin: lex (law) and latum (to bring forth). The term underscores the fundamental role of the legislator — to bring forth laws. Not seasoning cubes. Not sewing machines. Not ceremonial appearances.
As defined by the University of Oxford’s Department of Politics and International Relations, “A legislature is the branch of government primarily responsible for debating and passing laws. It is essential to democratic governance and the exercise of accountable power.” This definition aligns with Section 4 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which vests the National Assembly, State Houses of Assembly, and Local Government Councils with the responsibility to legislate, represent citizens, and perform oversight over executive actions.
However, across the states, particularly in State Assemblies, these responsibilities have been diluted. Many lawmakers now double as philanthropists and political job brokers, deploying public visibility through token gestures while legislative performance suffers in silence. Ibrahim and Bature (2022), writing in the African Journal of Public Policy, aptly warn: “Substituting philanthropy for legislative productivity erodes institutional integrity.”
The implications of this distortion are profound. Nigeria’s unemployment crisis, poor healthcare delivery, and weak education systems are not primarily the result of lack of funds but of weak or outdated laws and poor legislative reform. If lawmakers at all levels focus on enacting robust employment and investment laws, expanding the legislative framework for youth empowerment, and institutionalizing public sector accountability, fewer Nigerians would require political favours to access opportunities.
In developed democracies, including the UK and Canada, Nigerians secure employment or access services without lobbying politicians, because the laws work. The legislative institutions in those societies have created an enabling policy environment where governance is system-driven, not patronage-based. Sadly, in Nigeria, many now view employment facilitation as a political trophy. The failure of law has normalized personal favour.
The presence of rice bags and condolence canopies at political events is not a sign of compassion — it is a reminder that systemic support structures are broken. Aristotle’s dictum still rings true: “The rule of law is preferable to the rule of any individual.” Legislators should be evaluated through a governance lens: What bills have they sponsored in four years? What motions have been moved to address insecurity, inflation, or education policy? What institutional reforms have they initiated or defended?
Even so-called constituency projects, commonly deployed as evidence of performance, are executed by ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) — not directly by lawmakers. As Umar and Sadiq (2020) observed in a policy brief from the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS): “The rise of constituency projects has blurred the lines between law-making and execution, weakening the legislature’s core focus.”
Globally, democratic experts continue to sound the alarm. Philip Norton (2005), in Parliaments in Western Europe, writes: “A parliament that fails to legislate and scrutinize becomes a ceremonial vestige — a showpiece of democracy, not its engine.” That caution is directly relevant to Nigeria’s current trajectory.
The legislative arm of government is not a charity outlet. It is the policy engine room of a functioning democracy. Once that engine fails or is reduced to festive generosity, society becomes vulnerable to bad governance and corruption. If politicians seek credit for boreholes, school blocks, or food distribution, they should pursue executive roles — as governors, chairmen, commissioners, or ministers. But if elected as lawmakers, they must do what the title demands: Make laws. Represent. Provide oversight. Deliver policy reform. Period.
