Ex-Security Chiefs Split Over Governors’ Powers In State Police

Retired military and police chiefs have expressed divergent views on the powers governors should wield under the proposed state police arrangement.

According to Punch, the former security chiefs warned that while decentralised policing could improve security, strong safeguards must be put in place to prevent abuse.

Naija News reports that the comments came amid renewed calls by state governors for greater constitutional authority over security operations within their states and guaranteed funding for proposed State Police Services.

The governors’ position was contained in a report of a strategic meeting involving state Attorneys-General, legal experts and senior security officials convened by the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) Secretariat in Abuja.

The debate also followed President Bola Tinubu’s transmission of the Constitution Alteration Bill seeking the creation of state police to the National Assembly.

Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, on Tuesday, urged senators to ensure full attendance as the Senate prepares to consider the proposed amendment.

The bill is expected to be debated when the Senate reconvenes today.

Aro Backs Defined Powers

Commenting on the proposal, retired Brigadier General, Peter Aro, said state police should be treated as a deliberate security reform and not a political project.

He said governors should be given enough powers to respond to local security challenges, but within clearly defined constitutional limits.

According to him, decentralised policing would only succeed if operational control, funding and oversight mechanisms are properly structured.

Aro said, “State police should not be treated as a political slogan but as a structured security reform. By design, they are an extension of state authority, funded and managed at that level, with clear responsibility for local safety. This will make each state invest in reliable surveillance systems and ICT infrastructure so that security becomes intelligence-driven rather than reactive.

“This also allows a federal command-and-control centre to integrate data from all states, giving the Federal Government real-time visibility of threats nationwide, something that is largely missing in the current system where weak intelligence flow and poor coordination often delay response.”

The retired military officer maintained that state police should have broad powers over internal security operations, including intelligence gathering, investigations and community policing.

“State police should handle internal security challenges, including terrorism within their jurisdictions, while respecting clear constitutional boundaries. Matters relating to presidential and National Assembly elections must remain exclusively federal to preserve neutrality. Arrest, investigation, intelligence gathering and community security should rest with the states,” he stated.

However, he warned that mechanisms must be created to prevent politically motivated prosecutions.

“Where cases become sensitive or politically controversial, a neutral judicial-security panel or jury should review them before prosecution to prevent abuse of power. Some aspects of the Exclusive Legislative List can be ceded where security demands it, but safeguards must remain firm.

“Governors must be told to be decisive in the use of these powers, not to turn state security into a system of negotiation with terrorists and bandits. State police can strengthen Nigeria, but only if power is clearly defined, properly supervised and never allowed to become a tool for political misuse,” he added.

A retired Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Ali Amodu, in his own take, said governors should naturally have significant influence over state police because they would bear the burden of funding and maintaining the service.

“The recommendation made to the National Assembly made two points: one for the Federal Police Service and one for the State Police Service. The one the governors will have a say in, as provided by the Constitution, which recognises them as chief security officers of their states, is the State Police Service.

“That is the one they will have control over. But when I say control, it is not a question of hijacking anything. They will be responsible for the maintenance, the funding and everything associated with it. It will be the responsibility of the state governors to fund the police in the state, provide the equipment and make them functional in the interest of the people resident in the state,” he said.

Amodu acknowledged concerns that governors could seek excessive control over state police but insisted that Nigeria’s worsening security situation required urgent action rather than endless debate.

“I think what people are trying to guard against is a situation where governors may want more control over the policing system in their states. But I have said time without number, let us commence, let us start it. The challenges we are facing now are so enormous that we should not be scared of the governor trying to have control.

“Any governor, what he will have behind his mind, is how to effectively utilise the police in the state to deal with insecurity. That is what is facing us now and that is why everybody is in support of the creation of state police.

“Let us start it. It is when we start it that we begin to see where adjustments are needed. Any system that has advantages also has disadvantages. Those disadvantages will always be there, but as we go along, we are going to correct them and get going. What is important now is that we need effective security more than ever before, so we should not be afraid,” he added.

Also speaking, retired Brigadier-General, George Edim, argued that governors should be trusted with greater security responsibilities in line with democratic principles.

“We should practise democracy the way it is supposed to be. We blame the centre for every little thing. If there is insecurity, we blame Abuja. If there is kidnapping, we blame those in Abuja. If there is banditry, we blame Abuja.

“The governors should be given the power, but they should be checked. Notwithstanding our fears, state police are desirable. We should not allow the fear that governors will misuse it to make us go against it. The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.

“The pros far outweigh the cons. It is more favourable than less favourable. If the governors are properly empowered and the structures are well established, they can take care of the security of their own enclaves. That is the essence of decentralisation,” he said.

EX-AIG Wilson Questions Govs’ Request For More Power

Retired AIG Wilson Inalegwu, however, expressed reservations about governors’ demands for additional powers, insisting that adequate oversight mechanisms must be retained to prevent abuse.

According to Inalegwu, “What powers are the governors asking for? What specific powers? This is the fear that some of us have always expressed. The framework is essentially based on dual policing. The state police exist alongside the federal police.

“There are duties that cut across states which will remain under the federal police. Issues of cybercrime, very violent crimes like kidnapping and banditry, human trafficking and other offences that transcend state boundaries will remain within federal jurisdiction. The state police will deal with local issues.”

Inalegwu argued that no democracy could afford to place the enormous powers of the police in the hands of political office holders without strong checks and balances.

“Because of the enormous powers of the police, in any democracy, you cannot leave those powers without checks and balances. That is why you have the Police Service Commission and the National Police Council. Those institutions serve as oversight mechanisms.

“If similar state police structures are created, there must also be state-level oversight institutions. The fear is that because somebody reported a matter or criticised a government official, a governor may say, ‘Go and arrest him.’ That is not how policing works.

“The police is a creation of law. There are procedures. There are offences for which you can arrest with or without a warrant. There are offences that require court orders. The commissioner of police is guided by law and by the rule of law,” he said.

The retired police chief insisted that governors already possess substantial security powers and that what some of them seek goes beyond legitimate authority.

“The power they want is excessive power. It is an abuse of power they want. Even today, there is hardly any governor that gives a lawful directive to a commissioner of police that will not be carried out.

“But when you say, ‘Go and arrest this person,’ without due process, that is not the power the Constitution is talking about. The fact that a commissioner of police follows the law does not mean he is disobeying the governor. It simply means he is obeying the Constitution,” Inalegwu added.