State Police: Why Nigeria Should Not Be Held Back By Fear

By DIG Mohammed Usaini Gumel (Rtd)

The ongoing national conversation on State Police has attracted both strong support and genuine reservations. Those who oppose the reform often point to Nigeria’s historical experience with regional police and express concerns that decentralizing policing could lead to political abuse, threaten national unity, or undermine professionalism.
These concerns deserve respect. Constitutional reforms should never be undertaken lightly, especially where national security is concerned. Yet history should guide reform not prevent it.

Nigeria today is fundamentally different from the country that existed when the former regional police system was abolished more than five decades ago. Our democratic institutions have evolved considerably. Constitutional governance has become more entrenched. Judicial independence is stronger, legislative oversight is more robust, the media is more vigilant, civil society is more active, and citizens now enjoy unprecedented access to information and public accountability.

These institutional developments provide a far more suitable environment for designing a policing system that reflects contemporary democratic standards. Rather than allowing the mistakes of the past to discourage reform, we should use those lessons to build stronger safeguards against their recurrence.

Equally important, decentralized policing is neither novel nor peculiar to Nigeria. It is a well-established feature of many federal democracies. Countries operating federal systems have successfully maintained national and subnational police services with clearly defined constitutional responsibilities, professional standards, independent oversight and effective coordination.

Nigeria therefore enjoys the advantage of learning from both its own experience and international best practices. We are not starting from scratch. We have decades of comparative knowledge from which to adopt proven safeguards while avoiding earlier mistakes.

It is also important to understand that the current proposal is fundamentally different from the former regional police arrangement.

What is before the National Assembly is not the replacement of the Nigeria Police Force but the creation of a complementary policing framework. Under the proposed constitutional arrangement, the Federal Police and State Police would coexist, each exercising clearly defined constitutional responsibilities while cooperating through established mechanisms of coordination and accountability.

The Federal Police would continue to shoulder responsibility for national security, terrorism, transnational and interstate crimes, border security, organized criminal networks and other federal offences. State Police, on the other hand, would concentrate on community policing, local intelligence, enforcement of state laws, neighbourhood crime prevention and rapid response to local security challenges.

Far from weakening national security, this complementary arrangement has the potential to strengthen it by bringing policing closer to the communities it serves while allowing the Federal Police to focus more effectively on strategic national responsibilities.

One of the most frequently expressed fears is that State Police could be abused by political office holders.

That concern should never be dismissed. However, the possibility of abuse is not unique to State Police. Every constitutional institution carries inherent risks. Executive authority can be abused. Legislative powers can be misused. Electoral processes can be manipulated. Yet democratic societies do not abolish these institutions because of those risks. Instead, they strengthen constitutional safeguards, independent oversight, judicial review and public accountability.

The same principle should apply to policing.

The proposed constitutional framework already contemplates stronger safeguards than existed under the previous system. These include constitutional limitations on powers, minimum operational standards, independent oversight, legislative supervision, judicial scrutiny, intergovernmental coordination and clearly defined circumstances under which federal intervention may occur. These safeguards are intended to ensure that policing remains accountable to the Constitution and the rule of law rather than to individual office holders.

Perhaps the strongest argument for considering reform lies in Nigeria’s own experience.

For over five decades, our nation has relied almost exclusively on a centralized policing structure. During that period, successive governments have implemented numerous reforms, increased recruitment, reorganized commands, procured equipment and reviewed policing strategies. Yet public concern over insecurity has remained persistent across many parts of the country.

This observation should not be interpreted as a criticism of the Nigeria Police Force or its dedicated officers, whose commitment and sacrifices under extremely difficult conditions deserve national appreciation. Rather, it suggests that the scale and complexity of Nigeria’s contemporary security challenges may now require a more decentralized and complementary institutional response.
Security challenges are increasingly local in character. Effective intelligence often begins within communities. Timely intervention frequently depends upon officers who understand local languages, customs, geography and social dynamics. A complementary State Police system could significantly strengthen these capabilities while operating within national constitutional standards.

Finally, constitutional reform is not a one-time event. Democracies continuously refine their institutions as practical experience reveals strengths and weaknesses. If implementation exposes gaps, the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly retain the constitutional authority to amend the law, strengthen oversight mechanisms and improve operational arrangements. That is precisely how enduring democratic institutions evolve.

Nigeria should therefore approach this reform with confidence, caution and constitutional discipline—not fear.

If properly designed and responsibly implemented, State Police can improve community safety, strengthen intelligence gathering, enhance collaboration with the Federal Police and bring law enforcement closer to the people without compromising national unity.

After more than fifty years of relying on a single centralized policing model, giving a carefully regulated complementary policing system a fair opportunity is not a leap into the unknown. It is a measured constitutional response to changing security realities, informed by history, strengthened by comparative experience and guided by democratic principles.

The real question before Nigeria is not whether reform carries risks. Every meaningful reform does. The real question is whether we possess the wisdom to learn from our past, the courage to improve our institutions and the determination to build a policing system that better serves the security needs of all Nigerians.

History should remain our teacher—not our jailer.