For years, conversations about insecurity in Nigeria have often returned to a familiar question: can communities be better protected if security decisions are made closer to the people they affect?
This week, Nigeria moved significantly closer to answering that question.
In what many see as one of the most consequential security reforms since the return to democratic rule, the Senate passed a bill seeking to amend the 1999 Constitution to establish state police services across the federation. The development represents a major step in the Federal Government\u2019s broader effort to strengthen security architecture, improve local intelligence gathering, and bring policing closer to communities.
The legislation replaces the current single police structure with a dual system comprising a Federal Police Service and State Police Services, creating a framework that supporters believe will enable faster responses to security threats and deepen community-based policing.
The bill scaled second reading, underwent clause-by-clause consideration and passed third reading after securing the support of more than two-thirds of senators.
Swift Legislative Nod
Its passage came just 24 hours after President Bola Tinubu transmitted the Constitution Alteration Bill to the National Assembly as part of efforts to reform Nigeria\u2019s security framework.
According to the President, the proposal is intended to provide a legal foundation for a dual policing structure that allows states to establish and operate their own police services alongside the federal police.
Tinubu described the constitutional amendment as a critical part of ongoing efforts to reorganise Nigeria\u2019s policing system, enhance security, and better protect citizens.
He also noted that communities, and local governments would play more active roles in policing responsibilities under the new arrangement.
The proposal reflects growing calls for a decentralised security structure amid persistent concerns over insecurity, mass kidnappings and criminal activities in various parts of the country.
Supporters of state police have long argued that officers recruited and deployed within their local environments would possess better knowledge of communities, terrain, culture and emerging threats. They believe this would improve intelligence gathering and strengthen preventive security measures.
A major provision of the bill empowers state governors to appoint Commissioners of Police for their respective states, subject to confirmation by state Houses of Assembly.
Clause 17 of the proposed amendment provides that:
\u201cA State Police Service shall be headed by a Commissioner of Police of the State appointed by the Governor of the State on the recommendation of the National Police Council, subject to confirmation by the House of Assembly of the State and to such qualifications and national minimum standards as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly\u201d.
The legislation also outlines how governors and state police commands would interact.
Section 17(6) states that:
\u201cA governor may issue lawful written directives of a general policy nature to the Commissioner of Police on matters relating to the maintenance of public safety and public order within the state\u201d.
Addressing Pitfalls
Recognising concerns about possible abuse of state police by political actors, lawmakers incorporated several safeguards designed to protect civil liberties and democratic freedoms.
Section 17(7) specifically provides that:
\u201cA state Commissioner of Police shall not arrest, detain, investigate or deploy force against any person, political party or group merely for criticising the government except in accordance with the law\u201d.
The provision seeks to ensure that state police formations are not deployed against political opponents, journalists, activists or dissenting voices outside the provisions of the law.
The bill also establishes mechanisms for federal intervention in exceptional circumstances.
Under Section 214, the Federal Police Service may temporarily intervene in the internal security affairs of a state where there is an actual or imminent breakdown of public order that the state police service is unable or unwilling to contain, or where the governor requests assistance.
The amendment further provides:
\u201cThe Federal Police Service may temporarily intervene in the internal security affairs of a State and may, to the extent necessary, assume specified operational responsibility, including temporary operational command of a State Police Service or any part thereof, only where \u2013 (a) there is an actual or imminent breakdown of public order or public safety which the State Police Service is unable or unwilling to contain; (b) the Governor of the State requests federal intervention etc.\u201d
To prevent arbitrary intervention, the bill states:
\u201cAn intervention under subsection (10) of this section shall be authorised in writing by the President and shall state the grounds, territory, functions and duration of the intervention; and notice of the intervention shall be given to the Governor of the State, the Speaker of the House of Assembly of the State, the National Police Council and the National Assembly within forty-eight hours of the start of any intervention. (13) No intervention under subsection (10) of this section shall continue beyond such period as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly unless approved by resolution of the Senate in the manner prescribed by that Act\u201d.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio strongly backed the proposal, emphasising the importance of community-based security and local intelligence gathering.
\u201cYou will know when foreigners infiltrate Nigeria and alert security agencies so they can react proactively rather than reactively,\u201d he said.
Akpabio also stressed that safeguards would accompany implementation.
\u201cWe will do it in two phases through alteration and an Act of Parliament. There will be a lot of safeguards; let us come and do this important task. It is extremely important that we come tomorrow,\u201d he said.
Appealing for broad legislative support, he added:
\u201cWe need a minimum of two-thirds of members to vote on constitutional alterations. The issue of state police is non-partisan and cuts across geopolitical zones and interests.\u201d
Concerns about political interference have remained one of the most debated aspects of the proposal. However, proponents insist the constitutional safeguards are sufficient to prevent abuse.
Kaduna State Governor Uba Sani argued that fears surrounding governors\u2019 powers under the proposed system would be addressed.
\u201cI can tell you today that you can appoint the commissioner of police but you cannot sack him, that is the issue. You can\u2019t even sack him by the state assembly, no,\u201d Sani said.
\u201cIt must be with the approval of the Police Service Commission or Police Council as well as the National Assembly together with the State Assembly. So, there are a lot of safeguards to stop the abuse. It is there in that Act,\u201d he added.
Similarly, Peoples Democratic Party chieftain Segun Sowunmi dismissed concerns about abuse.
\u201cMr President, \u2018Eagle One\u2019, well done, because the argument people made that \u2018Oh, it would be abused\u2019 is annoying,\u201d Sowunmi said.
According to him, the reform would remove a longstanding excuse often cited by governors regarding insecurity.
With the Senate\u2019s approval secured, the bill must subsequently be passed by the House of Representatives and receive the endorsement of at least two-thirds of the 36 state Houses of Assembly before it can be signed into law by the President.
While the process is not yet complete, the Senate\u2019s action marks a significant milestone in Nigeria\u2019s efforts to modernise its security architecture. More importantly, it signals a shift toward a model that seeks to place security closer to communities, strengthen local intelligence and give states greater capacity to respond to threats before they escalate.<\/p>\r\n
Credit: Channels Tv<\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
For years, conversations about insecurity in Nigeria have often returned to a familiar question: can communities be better protected if security decisions are made closer to the people they affect? This week, Nigeria moved significantly closer to answering that question. In what many see as one of the most consequential security reforms since the return […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":944,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7188","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n