By Segun Adediran
At last, an advocacy of more than two decades is coming to fruition. On September 23, I took a bet in an opinion published here on President Bola Tinubu’s determination to bring the idea of state police to reality. Titled “State police: Tinubu’s date with history”, I had trenchantly argued that another foot-dragging might be costly for the country. It did.
Again, the President has called on the National Assembly to review existing laws to allow states to establish their own police forces as part of efforts to address rising insecurity across the country. This declaration was contained in a statement issued recently that declared a nationwide security emergency. “I call on the National Assembly to begin reviewing our laws to allow states that require state police to establish them,” the President said.
Now, there is no going back on the creation of state police forces. Foreign jihadist terrorists are saturating the country. Nowhere appears safe again. The red flag is discernible!
The National Assembly should invoke the Doctrine of Necessity to get everything done in a jiffy. The doctrine operates on the Latin maxim salus populi suprema lex (the safety of the people is the supreme law) and was prominently invoked in 2010 when the National Assembly appointed Goodluck Jonathan as the acting President during Umaru Yar’Adua’s incapacitating illness due to the President’s failure to transmit a written declaration of his inability to govern as required by the Constitution. The safety of the people is even more urgent than it was then.
For those who know The PUNCH and the values it stands for, the newspaper’s contributions to the emergence of the state policing system cannot be denied. The creation of the state police system is at the core of the newspaper’s unapologetic advocacy for a workable federalism for Nigeria. The case for state police is, at its core, a case for common sense and federal maturity. The current structure, enshrined in the 1999 Constitution, places policing exclusively on the Federal Government’s list, leaving state governors—theoretically the chief security officers of their domains—with no operational control over the police units tasked with protecting their populations. The Nigeria Police Force, commanded from distant Abuja, is fundamentally stretched thin and structurally incapable of community-level policing.
With a current personnel count far short of the United Nations’ recommended ratio of one police officer for every 400 citizens, the NPF remains an overburdened, poorly trained, and largely reactive force. Officers often do not speak the local language, lack intricate knowledge of the terrain, and are frequently perceived as an occupying force rather than a community partner. When kidnappers abduct villagers from forests or bandits raid farms, the delay in receiving commands from a far-off Inspector-General translates directly into lost lives and prolonged captivity.
Decentralisation offers the prospect of hyper-local intelligence, rapid response, and the integration of law enforcement with community structures—the very tenets of modern policing globally. By allowing states to recruit, train, and deploy their own officers, forces would be composed of local indigenes who understand the culture, topography, and the specific criminal networks operating in their backyards. This is not just a security reform; it is a profound step toward genuine fiscal federalism and democratic accountability, returning the principle of subsidiarity to law enforcement.
But embracing state police requires a sober reckoning with Nigeria’s complex political culture, where power is rarely used benignly. The greatest opposition to state police is not abstract but deeply practical: the very real fear that powerful state governors will hijack the force, turning state police into political militias, private security firms for the ruling party, or instruments of regional oppression.
This concern is neither hyperbolic nor unfounded. Nigeria’s political landscape is replete with examples of powerful figures using state resources to marginalise opponents or persecute ethnic and religious minorities. Giving governors absolute control over armed bodies, without stringent checks, risks formalising existing tendencies toward political thuggery and state-sponsored human rights abuses. As critics rightly warn, a hastily created state police force could become a tool for settling political scores, leading to a breakdown of democratic norms rather than an enhancement of public safety.
Furthermore, the issue of funding casts a long shadow. Many Nigerian states are fiscally weak, relying heavily on monthly federal allocations. Creating, equipping, and maintaining a professional police force requires astronomical investment in training, technology, salaries, and infrastructure. If state police forces are chronically underfunded, they will inevitably become susceptible to corruption, coercion, and the very ineptitude that plagues the current federal system. Decentralising incompetence solves nothing.
The legislative effort currently underway—spearheaded by the House of Representatives’ Constitution Alteration Bill, HB 617, which seeks to move policing to the Concurrent Legislative List—must be viewed not just as an opportunity for change, but as a framework for embedding necessary safeguards. The choice is not between state police and a flawless federal force; it is between a dysfunctional status quo that is costing countless lives and a decentralised system fortified by rigorous oversight.
The constitutional amendment must not merely transfer power; it must condition it. Any framework for state police must adhere to three non-negotiable pillars:
Strict institutional independence: The appointment and removal of the state commissioner of police must be insulated from the governor’s absolute control. The framework must mandate legislative ratification by the State House of Assembly and include robust oversight mechanisms by an independent State Police Service Commission, as proposed in the bill’s attempts to inject accountability.
Federal standards and oversight: To prevent fragmentation and ensure national cohesion, the Federal Police Service Commission must be empowered to conduct biannual certification reviews, guaranteeing adherence to national training standards, human rights protocols, and modern policing practices.
The federal police must retain the right to intervene, only in the narrowest circumstances, such as a complete and verifiable breakdown of public order that threatens national security, thereby preserving the unity of the federation.
Mandatory funding mechanisms: The National Economic Council must establish a minimum, non-discretionary funding threshold for state police, perhaps tied to a percentage of internally generated revenue or a dedicated state security trust fund, thereby ensuring financial viability and reducing reliance on the governor’s personal fiat.
Nigeria’s continued paralysis on this issue is a tacit endorsement of the anarchy consuming its provinces. The fear of what powerful governors might do with state police is entirely legitimate, but it must now be weighed against the catastrophic consequences of maintaining a centralised, failing system.
The path to a safer Nigeria lies in true federalism, which means accepting that local problems require local solutions. The country’s leadership has signalled that this reform is inevitable. The task now is to ensure it is not merely enacted, but implemented with the foresight, accountability, and political maturity that a federation facing collapse deserves.
Adediran writes via olusegunadediran@gmail.com
In this article