The debate over the necessity of state police to combat security challenges has resurfaced again. This thorny constitutional matter is dominating discourse in the wake of security breaches occasioned by wanton killings and kidnapping witnessed in rural areas. Widespread security challenges, sophisticated crime and sluggish response to security breaches by the federal police force has raised question about the capability of the police to maintain peace and security.
After a careful assessment of the constitutional role of the police vis-à-vis security challenges, it would be safe to posit that the police have performed below expectations.
The concept of state police is understood as conferring governors with power to maintain law and order, and whittling the powers of the president and Inspector General of Police (IGP) to provide security in line with Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution, which prohibits the establishment of any other police force. However, the practice of creating force for local purpose is not new in Nigeria. The Federal Government faced similar practice in the late 1960s before the Gobir Panel submitted its report to the military regime led by General Gowon and recommended the abolition of local police forces.
The herdsmen/farmers conflict, the nefarious activities of the Boko Haram in the Northeast, and kidnapping in the South has further advanced the argument for the decentralisation of the police, which would make the federating units responsible for their security needs.
The strongest argument in support of state police is that, it is in line with the principle of federalism which Nigeria practises. This school of thought has argued that a decentralised police force would promote the true spirit of federalism which advocates devolution of power to components units. More so, the executive powers of the federation are vested in the president by virtue of section 5(1) of 1999 Constitution, while that of the states are vested in the governors. Therefore, the existence of a federal police structure which gives the power to maintenance of law and order to the president is a lacuna which highlights the contradiction in Nigeria’s brand of federalism.
This school of thought also argues that state police would ensure that security is strengthened to the grassroots. Many have argued that the highly centralised and bureaucratic federal police structure has made NPF sluggish in responding to emergency security need. This argument was advanced by the governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom, who claimed he had made several calls and appeals through letter to the Vice President and IGP but to no avail. This, the governor said, was responsible for the New Year massacre, which led to the death of 73 people in the state. Perhaps, the situation could have been salvaged if there was an existence of state police.
At this juncture, one would begin to consider the option of state police, judging from Ortom’s argument. State police may be good on paper, but looking at our political environment, it could be a disaster. We must, however, consider the reasons against the undesirability of a state police. State police could be a potential time bomb that could destabilise the country if we did not thread cautiously. We must understand that claims of a local police to tackle security challenges locally must have run out of steam. We are in a global world, effective policing cannot be achieved locally.
Crimes no longer follow the conventional style; we have seen advancement in crimes being committed beyond national boundaries. I believe the global problem cannot be tackled by state police; security threats such as herdsmen/farmers conflict, terrorism, trafficking and secessionist movement are beyond the capacity of state police. National problems require national solution.
Secondly, an evaluation of our ecosystem is essential before implementation of policies. Unity of Nigeria is being threatened by myriad of challenges, including secessionist movement, political indiscipline, ethnic cleansing and religious fundamentalism; providing the state with means of coercion may take a negative toll on the polity. Our politicians are not civilised enough to manage opposition. We have instances where governors use the federal police against their opponents and dissidents.
State police could have negative repercussion on security of lives and property. There would be no security of tenure for leadership of the state police agency. A police commissioner refusing to dance to the tune of the governor that appointed him may be sacked. Such organisation may cave in under the weight of partisan politics. Also, many states do not have financial capacity to fund such agency. With exception of a few states, inadequate training and inability to pay salaries would eventually be the bane of the state police if allowed.
There are no misgivings that the security challenges in the country are getting worse daily. However, there is need to initiate mechanism to curb crimes. There should be structural changes to make NPF more effective. Firstly, the Federal Government should massively recruit officers with a minimum requirement of National Diploma or equivalent, while existing officers should upgrade their knowledge. Under-recruitment and inadequate training should be tackled.
United Nations recommends one policeman to 400 citizens, but Nigeria has the ratio of one policeman to 722 citizens.
Secondly, there should be an adoption of private security agencies to cover the inadequacies of the NPF, while also providing the NPF with intelligence report. Inter-agency cooperation between security agencies – the NPF and Army especially – would help to combat security challenges.
Technological revolution should be explored by security agencies for effective policing. Sadly, our police are poor when it comes to the use of technological innovations. With the right technological equipment and machinery, gathering of intelligence would be easier and this would help nip crises in the bud before they escalate.