One of the many pitfalls of Nigeria's Constitution is that while it provides that the Governors of the States are the chief security officers of the states, it denies the same chief security officers power over security issues in the states they govern.
The federal government is a layer of government in a federal system and not necessarily superior to the states, which are federating units. Why will the President have powers to appoint an inspector general of Police (IGP) and have powers to control and give directives to the IGP which he is mandated to comply with but state governors don't have similar powers to appoint and have control over the heads of police for their states? That is skewed federalism.
That an elected state governor cannot give lawful instructions or directives to the commissioner of police in the state he governs and the commissioner complies with the directives without having to refer to the inspector general of Police is anomalous in a truly federal system.
That a Superintendent of police will have the audacity to engage an elected state governor in an argument let alone challenge him over the governor's directive that he should end the siege in a community within his jurisdiction is yet another justification for the immediate review of not just the undemocratic Constitution we inherited from the military but even more urgently, the review our political structure.
Why will the IGP and the attorney general of the federation seat in far away Abuja and give orders that the federal police should lay siege in an area within a State - so called federating unit- without consultation with and or clearance from the governor of the state who is putatively humoured as the chief security officer? This is a caricature of federalism!
RULAAC calls on the national assembly to take seriously, in 2022, the urgent matter of constitutional review and in particular, ensure the review of all the anachronistic provisions in the constitution that inhibit democratic policing and that are generally inconsistent with federalism in a democratic system
If state governments are granted the power to make laws, then it logically follows that they should also have the powers to establish and control State apparatuses to enforce state laws. Currently, what obtains is that States depend on the Federal and centrally controlled police for the enforcement of state laws. And the federal police choose which state laws to enforce and which not to enforce depending on the interests of individuals or authorities outside the state.
Of course, just as the federal government controls and misuses the federal police, there are fears, genuine fears for that matter, that state governors will also misuse state police if allowed to establish it. But this fear cannot be an all-time barrier to doing what has become, on a balance of scale, an urgent and inevitable necessity.
To address the founded fears of potential abuse of state police, civil society made some recommendations in the report of the 2012 CSO Panel on Police Reform to wit, that:
1. Government should establish a committee to work out the modalities for the establishment of State police in states desirous of maintaining such, with a view to recommending the framework and measures that should be put in place to address the concerns against state police.
2. State Police should only be established on a basis of strict adherence to the principles of operational autonomy, and be based on sound professional practice in appointment,
operations and control.
3. There should be defined parameters of cooperation which provide that where a state does not fully cooperate with its counterpart or the Federal Police on any matter the Federal Police should take over and deal with the matter as is common in other jurisdictions, etc.
RULAAC maintains that security in a federal system should be decentralised. Crime and policing are both local.
The Federal police - owing to its unduly centralised structure - has over the years, proved incapable of addressing growing insecurity. The emergence of vigilante groups in the early 90s was a clear expression of loss of confidence in the ability of the federal police to effectively secure communities.
Many States have already established state agencies that carry out law enforcement duties even as the constitution prohibits the establishment of any other Police Force. The unending and rather increasing clamour for state police and the establishment of regional security networks lends credence to the popular demands for and tendency towards decentralisation of security in Nigeria.
RULAAC calls on the national assembly to revisit the reports of previous government committees and panels on police and Security sector reforms for guidance in reviewing the constitution to transform and democratise policing and strengthen federalism and true democratic practice.
Civil society organisations should work with the legislature to conduct informed debates in partnership with the media, towards amending the Constitution to allow for the establishment of State police and also produce a bill that will guarantee the establishment of independent and professional state police services..
Okechukwu Nwanguma
Executive Director
RULAAC