PSC: We’ve No Constitutional Powers over IGP

Linus Aleke in Abuja

The Police Service Commission (PSC), has said it did not have the constitutional powers to determine the appointment or exit of the Inspector General of Police.

The Commission said the clarification became necessary following multiple calls, messages and reports on the status of the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, in the aftermath of the Commission’s decision, directing all serving police officers, who had served for 35 years or attained the age of 60 years to proceed on immediate retirement in line with the nation’s existing laws.

A statement by Head, Press and Public Relations, Ikechukwu Ani, said the Commission was one of the Federal Executive  Bodies established under Section 153 (m) of the 1999 Constitution  of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended. 

Ani stated that by virtue  of paragraph 30, part 1 of the third schedule of the Constitution and clause 6 (1) of the Police Service Commission (Establishment) Act,  2001, the commission was charged with the responsibilities of appointment,  promotion, dismissal  and exercising  disciplinary control over persons holding offices in the Nigeria Police Force (except the Inspector General of Police).

He further clarified that the law was clear on the mandate of the commission, stating that it did not extend to the Inspector General of Police, being an appointee of the president with the advice of the Police Council.

“The Commission at its 1st Extraordinary Meeting of the 6th Management Board on Friday 31st January 2025, only considered and took decision on the regularisation of date of First appointment of CADET ASPs/Inspector Force Entrants. This has nothing to do with the Inspector General of Police or his office.

“The Commission at the Meeting passionately revisited its decision of 27th and 28th of September, 2017 and came to the conclusion  that the early decision that Force Entrants  should have their Cadet date of appointment in the Force against the date of enlistment, in its intent and purpose contradicted the principles of merger of service in the Public Service ‘and it is in violation of Public Service Rule No. 020908 (i  & ii) which provides  for retirement on attainment of 35 years in service or 60 years of birth’  It therefore set aside the earlier decision,” it said.

The Commission also stated that it was comfortable with the size of the powers, which the Constitution has bestowed on it and was not interested in shopping for more powers that obviously were not backed by law.