It is definitely not news that Nigeria grapples with a complex web of security challenges that threaten its stability and social fabric. Between extremist insurgencies and farmer-herder conflicts, almost every corner of the country has been greatly impacted by violence and crime.
Violent disputes over land, water, and grazing routes have escalated due to climate change and desertification. As herders move southward in search of pasture, thousands have lost their lives in clashes over limited resources. Benue State, located in the country’s center, has witnessed some of the deadliest attacks.
Recently, Amnesty International (AI), a non-governmental organization reported that clashes in Benue State between farmers and semi-nomadic herders have resulted in the death of more than 2,800 people between January 2023 and February 2024. The report also indicated that several rural markets in communities affected by herders’ violence were destroyed or closed due to insecurity.
Waving aside troubles with herdsmen, we also have bandits operating in various regions of the country, particularly in the northwest, who engage in kidnapping, extortion, and attacks on villages, further destabilizing communities. A busload of passengers travelling via Big Joe motors from Benin to Abuja was reportedly attacked very recently by gunmen who kidnapped the passengers around Okene in Kogi State. These criminal networks exploit ungoverned spaces, where rural communities suffer without adequate protection.
In addition to the aforementioned threats, there’s a resurgence of secessionist movements and incidents of Nigeria’s oil-rich Niger Delta region facing attacks on pipelines, refineries, and other critical infrastructure, disrupting oil production and exacerbating the unstable nature the economy.
Insecurity as a systematic issue
Nigeria’s insecurity woes are a longstanding issue that has plagued the country for decades, woven by a complex web of historical, social, and economic factors. One of these factors is the country’s colonial legacy, which artificially created a nation-state with diverse ethnic and religious groups, often at odds with one another.
Social factors, such as ethnic and religious tensions, have also played a significant role in Nigeria’s insecurity. The country’s diverse population has often been a source of conflict, particularly between the Hausa-Fulani and Igbo ethnic groups. Religious differences between Muslims and Christians have also fueled tensions, leading to periodic outbreaks of violence.
In spite of the country’s vast oil wealth, economic development has remained stagnant, leaving many Nigerians without access to basic necessities like education, healthcare, and employment opportunities. Not only has this created high rates of unemployment and poverty, it has also created an environment in which criminal activity and militancy can thrive.
Every single year, these challenges only seem to be getting worse, forcing concerned members of the society to ask: what exactly are our democratically elected leaders doing to address these pressing issues? What are the political elite doing? Corruption, nepotism, and cronyism have characterized successive governments, undermining the rule of law and perpetuating a culture of impunity.
Successive governments have failed to demonstrate the necessary political will to tackle the problem. Instead, they seem more comfortable resorting to short-term fixes, such as military force, without addressing the underlying causes of insecurity.
Centralization vs decentralization
Nigeria makes use of a centralized policing system, whereby the federal government controls the entire police force and their operations. Critics of this system assert that it is not entirely adequate in addressing the country’s diverse security challenges. The Nigeria Police Force, with its centralized command structure, often struggles to respond effectively to local security needs, leading to a disconnect between the police and the communities they serve.
These critics have argued that decentralizing the police force, with each state having its own police force, could provide a more effective solution to Nigeria’s security challenges. State police forces would be better equipped to understand and respond to local security needs, fostering a more intimate relationship between the police and the communities they serve.
Furthermore, since they would obviously have a much deeper understanding of local dynamics, culture, and language, they can respond more effectively to security threats, being more aware of local hotspots, criminal networks, and potential flashpoints, allowing for proactive measures to prevent violence and crime.
State police forces would also be better positioned to address local security needs, such as tackling cultism, kidnapping, and armed robbery, which are prevalent in many Nigerian states. They would also be able to focus on specific security challenges unique to their states, such as the insurgency in the northeast or the herder-farmer conflicts in the Middle Belt.
However, even with all these positives, not everyone agrees that decentralization is a tenable solution at the moment. During a national dialogue on state police in Abuja, organized by the House of Representatives, the theme of which was ‘Pathways to Peace: Reimagining Policing in Nigeria’, the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Ben Okolo, representing the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, stated that Nigeria is not yet prepared to adopt a decentralized police force.
Apart from the potential for abuse by state governors, Okolo cited other factors that undermine the feasibility of decentralization including but not limited to inadequate manpower, inadequate operational equipment such as vehicles, arms and ammunition, communication equipment, drones, aerial surveillance cameras, security surveillance helicopters, armoured vehicles, and inadequate training of personnel.
Responding to the Assistant IGP’s remarks, Former President Goodluck Jonathan argued that the growing prevalence of kidnappings and other vices makes the establishment of state police a necessity, emphasizing that the issue is no longer debatable or optional. Nevertheless, Jonathan further posited that the implementation of state police would require reforms to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), implying that the current structure of INEC is a hindrance to the decentralization of police forces.
He stated, “The National Assembly needs to look into all these. These are the areas that we have to concentrate on. The issue of the need for states to have their own police is not negotiable. There is no way we can continue this kidnapping that is going on in this country.”
“If we are talking about state police, we must also rejig INEC, and the police must not be used against or to the advantage of any political party. The issue of voting, the polling booths of INEC, and the use of police during elections has to be reviewed by the National Assembly.”
Facing constitutional hurdles
In many advanced democracies like Australia, Germany and Japan, police systems are less centralized. For instance, Canada administers police at municipal, provincial, and federal levels. Despite having fewer than two hundred police services, their detachments operate efficiently. In the Netherlands, regional police work closely with community safety teams, composed of social workers, mental health professionals, and police officers, taking a more integrative approach towards addressing security challenges.
Many Nigerians have been increasingly advocating for constitutional amendments in order to allow for the creation of state police forces, arguing that it would enable more effective and localized responses to security threats, rather than relying solely on the federal police.
However, the creation of state police requires constitutional amendments, which is easier said than done as it can be a lengthy and challenging process. Article 214 of the 1999 Constitution vests the responsibility for policing in the federal government. It reads: “There shall be a Police Force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to the provision of this section no other Police Force shall be established for the Federation or any part thereof.”
In order to overcome this hurdle, advocates are pushing for a review of the constitution to accommodate state police. Usually, this would involve securing the support of two-thirds of the National Assembly and the approval of at least 24 state houses of assembly.
On February 15, earlier this year, the Federal Government seemingly demonstrated its commitment to addressing the country’s worsening security situation by constituting a committee comprising governors to explore the possibility of establishing state police forces.
A police bill sponsored by Senator Kalu and 14 others passed its second reading on February 20, 2024. The bill titled: “A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Provide for Establishment of State Police and Related Matters”, is geared towards amending relevant sections of the 1999 constitution to enable states to establish their own policing outfits.
That being said, the House of Representatives’ outlined a work plan spanning from January 2024 to December 2025 which means that the process of amending the 1999 constitution to enable state police is expected to take approximately two years.
The debate on decentralizing the police force in Nigeria is still ongoing, with valid arguments on both sides. While some believe that state police forces would be better equipped to address local security needs, others cite concerns about potential abuse of power by state governors and inadequate resources.
Despite these challenges, many Nigerians remain hopeful that constitutional amendments will be made to allow for the creation of state police forces, which could lead to more effective and localized responses to security threats. It is quite clear that a comprehensive approach is needed to address the root causes of insecurity. This includes not only decentralizing the police force but also addressing social and economic factors, such as poverty, unemployment, and ethnic and religious tensions.
