AS the consensus and clamour for state police grows across the country, it is opportune to address the fears being expressed by some stakeholders against the decentralisation of civil security in Nigeria. Essentially, there is still opposition in several quarters that it could be deployed by state governors to oppress their political opponents, leading to clashes over federal and state police jurisdictions, and entrenching ethnic disunity and discrimination nationwide. Fortunately, the law on state policing can put practical provisions to constrict the governors from abusing the system.
At an emergency meeting on February 15 in Abuja, President Bola Tinubu and the 36 state governors agreed to legalise state police into existence by amending the 1999 Constitution that grants exclusivity to the Federal Government for now.
In line with this, the House of Representatives has commenced legislative work on the bill for state police, sponsored by Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu.
Policing in Nigeria witnessed its first schism after the January 15, 1966, coup by the military toppled the civilians. The usurpers turned Nigeria into a unitary state and centralised and destroyed the regional policing system the British colonialists bequeathed to Nigeria. Although Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1979 briefly before the Fourth Republic commenced in 1999, the civil political class has failed to re-introduce state police. There is no better time than now.
As security breaches reached a crescendo under the immediate past administration of Muhammadu Buhari (2015-2023), the then president and his henchmen subtly and overtly resisted the attempts by the South-West governors to establish the Amotekun corps, a watered-down version of state police.
The most notable opposition to state police recently comes from a former Kaduna Central Senatorial District lawmaker, Shehu Sani. He plainly refused to back the establishment of state police.
Although Southern Kaduna has become a hotbed of incessant killings, abductions, and arson by bandits, Sani stated that the ruling party in the state would use it as a vehicle to legitimise thuggery, oppression of opposition parties, harassment of non-indigenes, and other malfeasance. It would lead to anarchy between the federal and state police forces, he argued.
His fears are real. A former governor in Kaduna deployed security agents to hound his political opponents, including Sani. Other governors instigate the police to lock up journalists and critics on trumped-up charges.
Sani’s argument resonates with a First Republic Northern Elements Progressive Union politician, Salihu Yakassai, and a professor of political science, Jubril Ibrahim. They warned that state policing could lead to the proliferation of firearms, conflict of interest in the security architecture of the country and pose a threat to national unity.
Other critics point to the fact that governors would have problems funding state police. One of them is a retired Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Olusola Subair. Mostly, Nigerian police officers – retired and serving – think along this line.
To be fair, these are reasonable arguments, but they are not strong enough to sound the death knell for state policing. For one, it is an idea that is ripe considering that the security system has broken down irretrievably.
Two, these counterarguments do not take cognisance of the gross human rights abuses, extrajudicial killings, extortion, torture, and election meddlesomeness under the Nigeria Police Force. The police arrest innocents for “wandering.” They brutalise many others.
Just a force of 371,000 in a country of 220 million, the personnel shortfall is exacerbated by the provocative deployment of about a third of the personnel in illegal VIP duties. This alone is enough to undertake police devolution.
Police brutality of youths instigated the #EndSARS protests in 2020. Amnesty International said 15 people lost their lives to the attack on defenceless youths at the Lekki Tollgate in Lagos by security agents. Indeed, governors regularly also use the federal police to arrest opponents and perpetuate dastardly acts.
The current number of police officers is clearly not adequate. Many communities do not enjoy the presence of the police. This gives criminals the boldness to have their way. It is so bad that in 2020, the then Governor of Katsina, Aminu Masari, befuddled by the state of banditry, lamented that only 30 police officers were guarding 100 villages in the state!
The effect is devastating. In Tinubu’s first seven months in office, 5,135 persons were killed, per the National Security Tracker, a Project of the Foreign Relations Council. During the last Christmas festivities, gunmen slaughtered over 200 persons in three Plateau State LGAs.
In the ongoing mayhem, Katsina, Zamfara, Kaduna, Benue, Niger, and Taraba have come under vicious attacks by marauders. Benue Governor, Hyacinth Alia, alleged that the state had been infiltrated by foreign herdsmen from Niger Republic.
On several occasions, former Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo clamoured for state policing. Describing policing as “a local function,” he stressed: “State policing and other policing methods are the way to go. We cannot realistically police a country the size of Nigeria centrally from Abuja.”
Unwisely, Nigeria is the only federal entity in the world that does not operate devolved policing. All the other 24 federal countries do so. In Germany, there are three federal police forces with each of the 16 Länder (states) having its own police force. Policing is also devolved in Australia, Brazil, Belgium, Sweden, and Switzerland.
Policing in Canada is undertaken mainly by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and municipal police forces. The RCMP enforces federal laws and provides policing services in all territories and most provinces (except Ontario and Quebec). Most cities and many large towns there have their own municipal police forces. To ensure better security, Nigeria should learn from other federal countries.
In the United Kingdom, there are 45 territorial police forces and three special forces, despite its unitary political structure.
But the critics mean well. To address their fears, the issue of jurisdiction and funding should be spelt out clearly in the law. According to the United States Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is involved in civil rights, counterterrorism, foreign counterintelligence, organised crime and drugs, violent crimes, major offences, and financial crime. It collaborates with federal, state, local, and international enforcement, and intelligence agencies to apprehend criminals and terrorists.
The state policing architecture is a definitive silver bullet for the hydra-headed insecurity situation across Nigeria’s states. The country is under an insecurity siege: the menace of killings, abductions, and pillaging has not been curtailed due to the shortfall in the number of police personnel, and despite the intervention of the military through Joint Task Forces in all the 36 states.
Urgently, the recently inaugurated Federal Government committee on the establishment of state police should place clear operation modality, jurisdiction, and guardrails to limit the undue influence of ruling parties, the elite, and governors in the states. The NASS should expedite action on the constitutional amendments for states to undertake and equip their own police forces.
The concerns on the payment of state police officers should not be treated casually. As is being discussed in the parliament, the NASS should insert provisions in the law for funding and grants from the Federal Government. Police officers should be paid as and when due, trained, and equipped to discharge their duties.
Nigeria should explore several flexible models that ensure the equipping and sustainability of robust state policing in states.
