As the 36 state assemblies weigh the Sixth Alteration Bill, Nigeria confronts its oldest policing question: how to bring officers closer to communities without putting them at the disposal of political power. SOLA SHITTU writes
Nigeria’s long-running debate over how best to police a country confronted by kidnapping, banditry, terrorism, communal violence and other forms of insecurity has entered a decisive phase, with the 36 State Houses of Assembly now holding a major part of the constitutional key.
The National Assembly has transmitted the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Sixth Alteration) Bill, 2026, to all the State Houses of Assembly for consideration and approval, moving the constitutional amendment process beyond the federal legislature and into the states.
The transmission by the Clerk to the National Assembly, Kamoru Ogunlana, on 16 September means the proposed amendments must now face another constitutional test: approval by not less than two-thirds of the 36 State Houses of Assembly — 24 state legislatures — before the process can proceed.
Nigeria is approaching another major electoral cycle, while insecurity remains one of the central concerns of citizens, political parties and security institutions.
The return of the National Assembly from its current recess on 29 September will also provide a fresh opportunity for lawmakers to review developments in the constitutional alteration process.
At the centre of the debate is the proposal for the establishment of State Police Services alongside the Federal Police Service.
The proposal seeks to alter the existing constitutional policing arrangement under which policing is largely centralised. Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution currently provides for the Nigeria Police Force and prohibits the establishment of another police force for the Federation or any part thereof.
The proposed amendment would provide for a Federal Police Service and State Police Services, with individual states required to establish their own police services through legislation.
For Professor Sam Egwu, a political scientist at the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS), Abuja, the time has come for Nigeria to embrace the idea.
“The State Police matter is long overdue and the whole country is expecting it,” Egwu said.
He acknowledged that concerns over possible abuse by state governors could not simply be dismissed.
“Yes, we all know the likelihood of abuse by state governors is also there, but it is better to have it than not,” he said.
That position captures one of the central contradictions in the state police debate.
On the one hand, Nigeria’s security challenges have increasingly exposed the limitations of a highly centralised policing structure.
On the other, transferring greater policing authority to the states creates concerns about political interference, particularly in a country where governors wield enormous political influence.
The constitutional alteration proposal attempts to address some of these concerns by retaining national standards and mechanisms for dealing with disputes involving state police authorities. But whether those safeguards will be sufficient will depend largely on how the new system is designed, funded, supervised and held to account.
A Country Grossly Under-Policed Professor Jacob Nda of the University of Abuja approaches the matter from another angle — the sheer inadequacy of policing infrastructure and personnel across many Nigerian communities.
According to him, Nigeria is not merely dealing with the problem of centralised policing; the country is also grossly under- policed.
Nda recalled his experience growing up in a village community with a population of more than 10,000 people.
“I can remember my village community of more than 10,000 people having no more than one police station, with just a handful of officers in that station,” he said.
The problem, he added, extends beyond manpower.
The police station, according to him, was completely unequipped, with no vehicles even for the DPO. His observation raises another important question about state police.
Would creating state police services automatically increase the number of police officers available to communities, or would it merely create another layer of policing without addressing the fundamental problems of recruitment, training, logistics, communications, intelligence and funding?
For communities facing violent crime, the answer is unlikely to be found in constitutional language alone.
They need officers who can respond quickly, vehicles that can reach crime scenes, communications equipment, functioning stations and an effective relationship between the police and residents.
For ordinary Nigerians living with insecurity, however, the constitutional debate can appear distant from the daily realities of surviving in vulnerable communities.
Mrs Ene Dalong, a resident of Mararaba in Nasarawa State, said what matters to residents is having enough police presence to protect communities from attacks.
Her concern is particularly directed at what she described as regular attacks by street thugs.
“Our area needs more police presence to save the community from regular attacks by street thugs, and if the state police can do that, so be it,” she said.
Her position reflects the attraction of decentralised policing to communities that often feel disconnected from central security structures.
The argument is straightforward: if the police are physically closer to communities and their commanders have a better understanding of local security problems, response times could improve and intelligence gathering could become more effective. But proximity alone cannot guarantee effectiveness.
A poorly trained, poorly equipped and politically controlled police officer may be physically closer to the people without necessarily providing better security.
That is why the proposed constitutional change has implications beyond the simple question of whether states should have their own police.
It raises questions about standards, recruitment, training, funding, command, discipline, human rights and accountability.
At Zuba, one of Abuja’s major commercial centres, the absence of a dedicated police facility is another example of the infrastructure gap that continues to shape citizens’ experiences with policing.
Okechukwu Jombo, an auto spare parts dealer in Zuba, said it was difficult to understand why a major commercial market could operate without a police station within the market.
“Even though the market is the largest auto spare parts market in Abuja, there is no provision for a police station within it,” Jombo said. According to him, the situation becomes more difficult when traders need police intervention.
“Most of the time when they need police attention, they have to go and pay for it one way or another,” he alleged.
His allegation is one that would require independent verification, but it illustrates the perception among some traders that access to police services can itself become a burden. For policymakers, such experiences raise the issue of police accessibility.
A police station located within or close to a major market is not simply a security structure.
It can provide a point of contact for reporting crimes, resolving disputes, responding to emergencies and building relationships between law enforcement and the commercial community.
The state police debate is taking place against the backdrop of preparations for the 2027 general elections.
That makes the question of political control particularly sensitive.
Nigeria’s elections are often intensely contested, and security agencies play a major role in determining whether citizens can campaign, attend rallies, move freely and cast their votes without intimidation.
If state police were to become operational, governors could have greater influence over policing within their jurisdictions.
This could provide a significant advantage in terms of responding to local security threats, but it could also generate concerns about the use of security institutions during political contests. The concern is not entirely theoretical.
Governors are already influential political actors in their states. Giving them additional authority over policing would therefore require strong institutional checks.
This is where Professor Egwu’s observation becomes particularly relevant.
The possibility of abuse, he acknowledged, exists. But his argument is that the potential for abuse should not necessarily prevent Nigeria from establishing a system capable of addressing its policing deficit.
The challenge, therefore, is to construct safeguards capable of ensuring that state police serve the public rather than individual political interests.
The most important questions may ultimately be about control and accountability.
Who appoints the leadership of a State Police Service?
Who determines its budget?
Who investigates complaints against its officers?
What happens when a governor gives an instruction that a police commissioner considers unlawful?
Who protects opposition politicians, journalists, civil society activists and ordinary citizens if they come into conflict with the state government?
And what happens when security interests clash with political interests during elections?
These questions cannot be left to administrative practice.
They require clear constitutional, legislative and institutional safeguards.
The proposed alteration of Section 215 is therefore significant. It addresses the relationship between state governors and commissioners of police and provides mechanisms for dealing with disputes over directions.
The success of the state police proposal will ultimately depend on whether these safeguards operate effectively in practice.
The 24-State Hurdle
For now, however, the immediate challenge is constitutional approval.
Section 9 requires approval by not less than two-thirds of the Houses of Assembly of the states. With 36 State Houses, that means at least 24 must approve the relevant alteration.
The Clerk to the National Assembly has asked the State Houses to consider the Bill according to their legislative procedures and communicate their resolutions to the National Assembly.
Although the National Assembly expects the State Assemblies to respond within 30 days, it has expressly stated that the period is an administrative timeframe and not a constitutional deadline. That distinction is important.
The State Houses are constitutionally independent in the consideration of the proposal and may follow their respective legislative procedures before reaching decisions.
The next phase could therefore generate extensive debates across the states.
Some lawmakers may focus on the security benefits of bringing policing closer to communities.
Others may demand stronger safeguards against political interference.
Questions about funding will also be unavoidable.
State police will require recruitment, training institutions, barracks, vehicles, communications systems, weapons, forensic facilities, information technology and welfare structures.
The financial capacity of individual states varies considerably.
A constitutional amendment that establishes state police without a sustainable financing mechanism could produce a system in which some states have relatively sophisticated police services while others struggle to maintain basic operations.
September 29 And The Road Ahead
The National Assembly’s 29 September resumption will come at an important moment.
By then, the State Houses of Assembly will have begun examining the constitutional alteration proposals, while lawmakers in Abuja will be waiting for the responses required for the next stage of the process.
The state police debate could, therefore, become one of the most closely watched elements of the Sixth Alteration process.
It is a debate that goes beyond politics. For Professor Nda, the fundamental issue is the country’s policing deficit.
For Professor Egwu, the demand for state police has become too pressing to ignore despite the possibility of abuse.
For Dalong in Mararaba, the question is whether residents can have more police presence to protect them from street violence.
For Jombo in Zuba, it is about having accessible policing within a major commercial community.
These perspectives converge on one point: Nigerians want security that is present, responsive and accountable.
The constitutional amendment may provide the legal foundation for a new policing architecture, but it cannot by itself guarantee any of those things.
That responsibility will ultimately fall on the federal and state governments, the police authorities, the legislature, the judiciary and the citizens themselves.
As the 36 State Houses of Assembly begin their consideration, Nigeria is, therefore, confronting a question that has been debated for decades:
Can the country bring policing closer to its people without bringing the police too close to political power?
The answer will shape not only the future of policing in Nigeria, but potentially the security environment in which the country approaches the 2027 elections.
0 Comments