By: Ousman A. Marong
Nyang Njie, an economist, political commentator, and former Head of Branding and Communication at the OIC Secretariat, has stood by his choice to resign, emphasizing that his drive has always been about the impact he can create, not just the paycheck.
He believes that individuals shouldn’t let public opinion dictate their choices. Instead, he argues that personal integrity, independence, and self-respect should steer one’s decisions.
“They can say whatever they want. We all have our names and identities, and we must be accountable for who we are, not just what others say about us,” he remarked.
Njie pointed out that employment shouldn’t be seen as a lifelong commitment; people have the right to leave their jobs when they feel they can no longer make a meaningful contribution.
“Work is at-will, and we have the freedom to resign whenever we choose. I didn’t work just for a monthly salary; I was motivated by the impact I could have. If I ever feel I’m not making a difference, I won’t hesitate to move on,” he explained.
He expressed confidence in his ability to work independently and create opportunities for himself, which gives him the freedom to step away from a role when necessary.
“I believe I can thrive anywhere, anytime. I don’t rely on a single employer for my income because I can forge my own path. That independence has always fueled my motivation,” Njie added.
He referenced a Wolof saying to highlight how crucial self-awareness, dignity, and personal discipline are, noting that these traits help individuals navigate tough choices without being swayed by others.
He believes that resignation shouldn’t automatically be seen as a failure; rather, it can be a responsible choice when someone can no longer fulfill the role they were meant to play.
“What a worker should do is contribute meaningfully to people’s lives or aid in the nation’s progress. If those goals can’t be met, then I think resigning is the best course of action,” he stated.
Why he stepped down from the OIC Secretariat
Njie expressed his gratitude that, since leaving the OIC Secretariat, he hasn’t faced any accusations of misconduct related to his tenure.
He shared that he resigned a day before the summit, explaining that his decision stemmed from concerns about developments he felt didn’t align with his vision for the country.
“I’m thankful that since my resignation, no one has claimed I did anything wrong. I stepped down a day before the summit, and I’ve refrained from gossiping or pointing fingers,” he remarked.
Njie elaborated that his initial motivation for joining the OIC Secretariat was to help foster national development. However, he eventually found himself in situations that clashed with his expectations.
He mentioned that he intentionally chose to resign before the summit instead of on the day of the event, as he wanted to avoid causing any complications for the country.
His comments indicate that, for him, resigning was more than just leaving a position; it was about staying true to his values while ensuring that a significant national event could proceed smoothly.
‘Politics should propel nations forward’
Shifting to the topic of politics, Njie characterized it as a vital aspect of daily life and a way for societies to organize themselves and shape their futures.
He said politics should serve the interests of citizens and advance national development, rather than become a pathway for individuals seeking personal benefits.
“Politics is part of people’s daily lives. It is supposed to be organised in a way that allows citizens to determine the direction of their country. The purpose of politics should be to move nations forward,” he said.
However, Njie expressed concern that politics was increasingly being treated as a means of personal advancement, a tendency he said was not limited to The Gambia or Africa.
He criticised what he described as a culture in which people seek to advance themselves by using others, arguing that such attitudes undermine public service and hold countries back.
“Politics has reached a point where some people are willing to ask others to bend down so they can climb on their backs. This is because they have come to see politics as a gateway to success,” he said.
Njie described this approach as selfish and lacking sympathy for ordinary citizens, arguing that many people enter politics not because they aspire to become president or pursue a particular national vision, but because they want access to the benefits and resources associated with political power.
He said this attitude was damaging because it prioritised personal interests over the collective good
According to Njie, politics should be about serving citizens and ensuring that national resources and opportunities benefit the wider population, rather than becoming a competition for access to the country’s resources.
He warned that when political participation is driven primarily by personal gain, it risks undermining national progress and weakening the purpose of democratic governance.
Pierre Njie and the politics of historical misrepresentation
Njie also criticised what he described as the misrepresentation of historical political figures in The Gambia, particularly Pierre Njie, whose legacy he believes has been misunderstood by sections of the public.
He expressed concern that some Gambians had come to view Pierre Njie negatively, linking this perception to accounts of him in a book attributed in his remarks to British writer Backle Rise, titled Enter Gambia: The Birth of an Improvable Nation.
Njie argued that the portrayal of a historical figure in a particular publication should not automatically become the final judgment on that person’s contribution to the country’s political development.
He suggested that historical political figures should be assessed through a broader understanding of the political circumstances of their time, rather than through isolated accounts or inherited public perceptions.
Njie further noted that tribal and ethnic considerations were significant during Pierre Njie’s political era. He referred to the role of Sanjally Bojang and the Mandinka community in the emergence of the political movement that eventually became the People’s Progressive Party (PPP).
He said the movement was initially known as the Protectorate Party before becoming the PPP, highlighting the importance of understanding the historical context in which political parties emerged and developed.
His comments pointed to the need for a more nuanced assessment of the country’s political history, including the influence of ethnic identity, political organisation and the contributions of individuals and communities.
Drawing parallels between Pierre Njie and Ousainou Darboe
Njie said he saw similarities between Pierre Njie and lawyer Ousainou Darboe, describing both as political figures who, in his view, had been widely misunderstood and misrepresented.
“I have seen something in Pierre Njie that I have also seen in lawyer Ousainou Darboe. Pierre Njie was one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented figures in Gambian politics. People placed him in a category where he did not belong,” he said.
Njie argued that Darboe had faced similar treatment, saying the veteran opposition politician had been subjected to labels and characterizations that did not accurately reflect who he was.
“Lawyer Ousainou Darboe is also a highly misunderstood political figure. People have been calling him names and attaching labels to him that do not reflect who he really is,” he said.
Njie’s comparison suggests that public perceptions of political figures can be shaped by partisan narratives and repeated characterisations, sometimes at the expense of a fuller assessment of their records and contributions.
His remarks also returned to a central theme of his comments on resignation and independence: the distinction between what people say about an individual and the individual’s own character, principles and actions.
For Njie, that distinction is important not only in personal and professional life but also in the interpretation of Gambian politics and history. He argued that political leaders and historical figures should be assessed on their contributions and the substance of their actions, rather than simply on the labels attached to them.