Delineating role of NSA

The arrest and detention of former National Security Adviser (NSA) Sambo Dasuki for allegedly engaging in phantom arms contracts, and hampering the fight against Boko Haram brings to the fore the whole question of the role of the NSA.  As NSA Dasuki is alleged to have awarded fictitious contracts for purchase of jets, helicopters, and […]

The arrest and detention of former National Security Adviser (NSA) Sambo Dasuki for allegedly engaging in phantom arms contracts, and hampering the fight against Boko Haram brings to the fore the whole question of the role of the NSA.  As NSA Dasuki is alleged to have awarded fictitious contracts for purchase of jets, helicopters, and ammunitions for the army to fight Boko Haram which were never delivered. Furthermore it is alleged that he instructed the Central Bank to transfer more than $140 million to accounts in Britain, the US and West Africa without any contract documents.
In his defence the former NSA claims he had always served Nigeria “with the best intentions”. However arms procurement is supposed to be under the purview of the Ministry of Defence and the NSA is supposed to only advise on the procurement.  The NSA is a senior aide to the President who serves as the chief in-house adviser on security issues.  The Office of the NSA is in fact a staff position in the Executive Office of the President and does not have line or budget authority over the Minister of Defence, Minister of the Interior, Service Chiefs or Inspector General of Police (IGP) who are Senate confirmed officials with statutory authority over their departments. The National Security Council was established by article 153 Third Schedule Part 1 (K) of the Constitution and the post of NSA is defined by the current executive order defining the work of the Council.
Appointed by the President without confirmation by the Senate, the influence and role of the NSA varies from one administration to another and depends on both the qualities of the person appointed to the position, and also on the style and management philosophy of the incumbent President. In the American system which we claim to practice the NSA is officially known as the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. 
He is supposed to serve as the Chief Adviser to the President on national security issues. He serves on the National Security Council and is assisted by staff who produce research, briefings and intelligence reports. Ideally the NSA should serve as an honest broker of policy options for the President in the field of national security, rather than as an advocate for his own policy agenda.
It is not in the national interest to have a powerful NSA with a strong staff only answerable to the president when there is a tendency for each new president to replace the NSA and senior National Security Council staff. It has become habitual for NSA’s in Nigeria to overreach themselves. In order of precedence external security is the responsibility of the President, followed by the Minister for Defence, the Chief of Defence Staff then the NSA. Internal security is the responsibility of the president followed by Minister of Interior, Inspector General of Police (IGP) then the NSA.
The State Security Service (SSS) also known as Department of state Security (DSS) is the primary domestic intelligence agency in Nigeria. It is one of three successor organizations to the National Security Organization (NSO) dissolved in 1986. The DSS operates as a department within the presidency and is the only agency under the control of the NSA. The mission of the DSS is to protect and defend the Federal Republic of Nigeria against domestic threats, to uphold the criminal laws of the country and protect high ranking members of government.
With the growth of terrorism and insurgency it is with respect to this function of protection against domestic threats that the NSA as head of DSS comes into conflict with the Inspector General of Police and the Service Chiefs. The current travails of Sambo Dasuki supposedly arise from the fact that President Jonathan was not pleased with the fact that despite their huge annual budgets the military were unable to equip themselves adequately in the war against terror.
The solution should have been to bring the military once more under the control of the Ministry of Defence. The decision to use the NSA to source for weapons was not only a mistake it was un-constitutional. Good intentions cannot justify illegal actions. The impunity which followed was a natural consequence.
Instructions given to the Central Bank and to government parastatals to provide funds for arms purchase outside of appropriation are inexcusable. It is of utmost importance that military and security expenditure follows budgetary processes and no serving NSA should be placed in a position where he must commit illegalities in order to serve the nation with “the best intentions”.