State Policing: Outgrowing The Outdated Constitution In Modern Day Security Threats

By Eben Enasco

President Bola Tinubu’s recent position adds federal weight to the growing concerns and the need to propose or make a bill to end the massive attacks across the country. Tinubu called for bold constitutional amendments that would move policing from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List. Enabling states with the capacity and political will to establish their own police forces would ensure more accountable, community-based policing while preserving federal coordination and oversight. Adopting decentralized policing models that enhance local accountability without sacrificing national oversight should be the best approach and we must learn from global best practices. With the 1999 Constitution being the foundation of Nigeria’s democracy, threats to citizens’ security have proven that the current approaches by the government are now obsolete. A clear indicator is the rising complexity of terrorism, cybercrime, farmer-herder conflicts, piracy, and separatist agitations. Nigeria’s current legal framework has become inadequate to secure the vast and diverse territory, where a section of the nation’s ethnic groups believes it’s their rights to wield guns and that government would look away while others are being killed.

Nigeria’s current policing structure, as outlined in the Constitution, has been a subject of debate in recent years.

With the increasing insecurity threats facing the nation, there is a growing call for a review of the policing system to make it more effective and responsive to the needs of the people.

The current centralized policing system has been criticized for being ineffective in addressing the unique security challenges facing different states.

State policing, on the other hand, would allow states to take ownership of their security and develop policing strategies that are tailored to their specific needs.

Diverse opinions have voiced the advantages and disadvantages, but it has not ended the position of the authorities on taking a step to reform the 1999 constitution to allow States to have their policing frameworks.

The fear mostly advanced by citizens is of the politicians, especially governors hijacking the security apparatus to favor their political ambitions.

Another area that may pose a threat is funding, which is most critical.

States would need to allocate sufficient resources to fund their policing operations if the security votes received monthly would be channeled towards it.

State police officers would require training and capacity building to ensure they are equipped to handle the unique security challenges facing their states.

Despite these daunting tasks, some of the benefits include, enable faster response times to security threats, as police officers would be more familiar with the local terrain and communities.

There will also be increased community engagement and participation in security matters, leading to more effective policing.

For better intelligence gathering and sharing, as police officers would have a deeper understanding of the local context.

State policing would require effective coordination with federal agencies, such as the Nigerian Police Force, to ensure a unified approach to security.

State Governors, traditional leaders, and civil societies have all spoken in one tune calling for the establishment of state police as a solution to Nigeria’s overstretched and often underperforming security agencies.

President Bola Tinubu’s recent position adds federal weight to the growing concerns and the need to propose or make a bill to end the massive attacks across the country.

Tinubu called for bold constitutional amendments that would move policing from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List. Enabling states with the capacity and political will to establish their own police forces would ensure more accountable, community-based policing while preserving federal coordination and oversight.

Adopting decentralized policing models that enhance local accountability without sacrificing national oversight, should be the best approach and we must learn from global best practices

With the 1999 Constitution being the foundation of Nigeria’s democracy, threats to citizens’ security have proven that the current approaches by the government are now obsolete.

A clear indicator is the rising complexity of terrorism, cybercrime, farmer-herder conflicts, piracy, and separatist agitations.

Nigeria’s current legal framework has become inadequate to secure the vast and diverse territory, where a section of the nation’s ethnic groups believes it’s their rights to wield guns and that government would look away while others are being killed.

The National Assembly, particularly the House Committee on Constitution Review led by Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu, must act with precision and higher commitment in pushing through security-focused amendments.

Nigeria’s complex security landscape demands strategies that are “multi-dimensional, inclusive, technology-driven, and adaptable,” anchored in a solid legal and institutional framework.

With previous legislation on security often developed without adequate input from those directly involved in frontline operations, it will make a lot of sense to allow the people victimized by the occasion to add value to the constitutional amendment.

It is the Constitutional importance that should evolve to reflect the hopes and challenges of Nigerians, where grievances, protecting rights, and fostering trust between citizens are shared.

None of these reforms may materialize without legislative courage and political will, to deal with the security challenges.

Therefore, the call for state policing is a timely one, given the increasing security threats in Benue, Kaduna, Plateau, Kanu, Zamfara, Edo, Borno and other states where insurgency have predominantly spiraled uncontrollably for over a decade now.