THE MOVE FOR STATE POLICE

State policing is overdue in Nigeria

In a major endorsement for State Policing in Nigeria, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu recently called for an urgent overhaul of our security framework through constitutional reform. “The debate over State Police is no longer theoretical. It is grounded in the daily fears and live anxieties of Nigerians: farmers afraid to tend their fields, traders unsure of safe passage, and communities abandoned to self-help,” he said during a one-day legislative dialogue on constitutional review and national security architecture, organised by the House Committee on Constitution Review in collaboration with the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA).

 For years, governors have argued that each of the federating units (which the 36 states represent) should have control over their own security apparatus even when there will still be federal police. And the governors have very compelling reasons to ask for the decentralisation of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) as presently constituted. They, as the chief security officers of their states, bear huge responsibilities for the upkeep and maintenance of the police in the form of logistics, allowances and other forms of assistance. But they have no control or power over these police commands, whose men take orders from Abuja. Besides, the NPF is so overwhelmed to the extent that a huge slice of the military asset is now deployed to perform police duty with serious implications on professionalism of the military.

As things stand in Nigeria today, there are compelling reasons for state police and many critical stakeholders have for years canvassed the idea. Last year, a former NSA, Aliyu Mohammed Gusau, advocated a rethink of the current strategy. “With an estimated population of 223.8 million and a diverse terrain covering 923,768 square kilometres, Nigeria is a difficult country to secure,” Gusau said while making a case for state police. “Therefore, expecting a single Police Force to patrol and control such a large and complex nation effectively is a very tall order indeed.” Former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo had expressed a similar sentiment when he said, “there is no federation of our size that does not have state police.”

 Many retired senior police officers have also put their weight behind the idea of state police on grounds that it would improve the management of internal security and the maintenance of law and order. The compelling argument is that such men and officers would have local knowledge of the environment and would be more effective in dealing with local crimes, protecting law and order and in intelligence gathering. 

Ordinarily, state police is an extension of true federalism where each of the units is supposed to have control of its security apparatus. But beyond that is the growing challenge of insecurity that needs fresh thinking. “The pace of change in technology, in the complexity of security threats, and in the dynamics of our federal structure has far outstripped the capacity of some constitutional provisions,” the president said last week. “Our Constitution must evolve or risk becoming a danger to the very unity it was meant to protect.” 

 There are also genuine concerns that under a situation in which many of the governors cannot pay salaries in their states, to put guns in the hands of policemen whose emoluments are not guaranteed will be dangerous and counterproductive. But notwithstanding potential pitfalls, we believe that the merits of having state police are overwhelming. It’s time to amend the constitution to reflect the current reality. While hoping that the National Assembly, working with the Conference of Speakers of the 36 Houses of Assembly that has already endorsed the idea would put in the necessary safeguards, we align ourselves with the strong view that the country is overdue for the establishment of state police.