Nigeria’s policing crisis is often discussed in terms of brutality, torture, and unlawful killings. Less discussed, but equally destructive, is the systematic theft and conversion of recovered property by police units, a practice that turns law enforcement into a predatory enterprise. Recent information emerging about the police facility popularly known as Tiger Base in Imo State exposes a disturbing pattern that goes beyond misconduct into what can only be described as organized criminality under the colour of authority.
Under established police procedure, when a vehicle is recovered in the course of investigation, the police are required to issue a recovery signal to divisions and formations nationwide. From there, the information is transmitted to the police and public radio system so that rightful owners can identify and reclaim their property. Recovered vehicles are to be properly logged, preserved as exhibits, and where unclaimed, can only be auctioned after due notice and after a minimum waiting period.
At Tiger Base, this procedure has allegedly collapsed completely.
Fresh information indicates that recovered vehicles are no longer announced or signalled. Instead of notifying the public, operatives allegedly conceal recoveries, convert vehicles to personal use, or dispose of them through opaque and unlawful means. Even more troubling is the claim that when victims independently locate their stolen vehicles, they are not assisted by the police but threatened, intimidated, or chased away. In some cases, the same officers tasked with recovering stolen property allegedly turn on the rightful owners as adversaries. Victims also report that recovered vehicles are deliberately altered - including repainting to change original colours and replacing or tampering with registration details - in what appears to be a calculated effort to conceal identity, frustrate tracing, and permanently sever the link between the vehicle and its lawful owner.
Reports further suggest that several operatives, including senior officers, are in possession of multiple flashy vehicles, allegedly drawn from recovered assets. There are claims of vehicles being shared among officers on a rotational basis, while others are allegedly sold or “auctioned” without advertisement, transparency, or compliance with due process. The allegation that officers wait their turn to collect recovered vehicles paints a picture of a unit operating less like a law enforcement agency and more like a cartel managing spoils.
Particularly disturbing are allegations that female police officers attached to Tiger Base were allocated vehicles by the unit commander from recovered assets, reinforcing the perception of a reward system built on criminal conversion rather than lawful service. If proven, this represents not only corruption but the institutionalization of theft within a police unit.
The implications are grave. When the police steal recovered property, they are not merely corrupt; they are re-victimizing citizens who have already suffered crime. They are destroying trust in law enforcement, discouraging victims from reporting crimes, and feeding a vicious cycle where crime thrives because those meant to fight it profit from it.
This pattern also fits into a broader and well-documented narrative about Tiger Base: allegations of torture, unlawful detention, enforced disappearances, and impunity. Asset conversion is not an isolated problem; it is part of a culture of lawlessness sustained by secrecy, lack of oversight, and tolerance from higher authorities.
My concerns are not abstract. In the course of my work, I have been directly involved in handling a case involving a recovered Toyota Highlander which was traced to Anambra State and recovered from the fourth buyer in the chain of transactions. The vehicle was recovered by operatives of Tiger Base after it was snatched from its owner, a victim of kidnapping. He incidented the case after he regained freedom from his kidnappers. Rather than the recovery triggering transparent documentation, signalling, and a clear pathway for the rightful owner to reclaim the vehicle, the handling of the matter raised serious concerns consistent with the broader allegations outlined above.
This personal experience reinforces what many victims have reported: that once Tiger Base recovers a vehicle, the process often becomes opaque, discretionary, and vulnerable to abuse, rather than rule-bound and victim-centred. Such cases illustrate how recovery, instead of closing the chapter of victimisation, can open a new phase of intimidation, obstruction, or illicit appropriation.
If Tiger Base is allowed to continue operating in this manner, it will remain a symbol not of security, but of state-sanctioned criminality. Reforming or dismantling such structures is not optional; it is essential to restoring the rule of law and public confidence in policing in Nigeria.
The question Nigerians must ask is simple: who polices the police when the police become the thieves?
Okechukwu Nwanguma
Executive Director, RULAAC