Follow Us on Google
From Taiwo Oluwadare, Ibadan
Sir Mike Okiro is a former Inspector General of Police and one-time Chairman of the Police Service Commission (PSC). He spoke with Daily Sun on the state police. Excerpts:
The National Assembly has passed the Constitution Amendment Bill, putting the police on the Concurrent List, with the view to giving legal basis for the establishment of State Police upon receiving the concurrence of the State Houses of Assembly. How do you see this?
The amendment to Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution to establish a dual police structure, passed by the National Assembly, I want to say was long overdue. Before this time, I had advocated for zonal police offices in each geopolitical zone. This is not only because of the highly disturbing security situation in the country, but also in view of the fact that Nigeria is too large to have a single police force. The over-centralised nature of the Nigeria Police has adversely affected its effectiveness.
The good thing about the current high level of insecurity is that it should push state governments to take responsibility. The Federal Government cannot handle it alone because the police alone do not oversee internal security in the way they should. That is true. The Police have failed all these while because the government had failed to remove the legal encumbrances and budgetary inadequacies. And because the government has failed, insecurity has festered, almost overrunning everyone.
Though the police are the lead internal security providers, they currently enjoy massive support of other security agencies, like the Army, Air Force and DSS in quelling internal security. You should also know that the manpower level for police is low compared with the population. Besides, many of them are often involved in executive and diplomatic protection. So, let us unite the states and empower them legally to be adequately involved in policing. I really support it.
The amendment of the section of the Constitution comes with a change of name from the Nigerian Police Force to Nigeria Police Service. How appropriate is this?
It is an indication that their duty is about service to the nation. It is not a military force, rather the change of name is designed as a philosophical re-orientation towards community policing, accountability and service as done globally.
In my view, that is in conformity with the Sir Robert Peels foundational philosophy of policing put forward in 1829. It places more emphasis on crime prevention, community cooperation and minimal use of force. The police are members of the society, hence the emphasis on community-based policing anchored on mutual trust, especially for some time now where trust in police officers has been in short supply.
Besides operational duties where a certain level of force (minimum or maximum) could be used. You are aware that the police carry out prevention of crime, liaising with community leaders and civilian population to ensure safety of life and property; and ensure safe and secure environment for legitimate business activities.
They also investigate cases, compile case files and present such evidence linking crimes to criminals and serve as prosecutors in criminal cases. All these are enormous duties. So, it is a service, just like we now have Correctional Centres in place of the Nigeria Prison Service.
The Bill will also permit each state to establish and control its police service, with the governor serving as chairman of the State Police Service Council. Along with this is the inherent fear of abuse. How do you react to this?
Yes, from the onset, the proposed State Police Council will set up policing policies in their respective states, manage, recruit and be accountable to the people. The council will give direct oversight while the Commissioner of Police, who will be appointed by the governor will be the secretary of the council. He will serve a single term of four years.
Here lies the fear of abuse by state governors, as it was during the First Republic where regional premiers used the police against the opposition. But there must be safeguards in this case. Governors could become so powerful that they exploit their positions. There should be checks and balances to make it impossible for a governor to have 100 per cent control. This is a federation, and no governor should be able to take actions detrimental to other states. If such actions occur, there must be clear consequences written into the law.
No law is perfect and no country is perfect, but we can fly with this. In my view, the amendment will go a long way in balancing local policing autonomy with national cohesion, accountability with operational effectiveness and federal oversight with state responsibility.
The legislation clearly bars governors from deploying state police for partisan, ethnic, religious, sectional or personal purposes. It stipulates that the president and governors may issue only lawful, general policy directions in writing and prohibits any directive targeting named persons, political parties, groups, or requiring rights violations.
Of course, there are also tight limits on deployment and removal of police chiefs to prevent abuse. That is besides the Complaints Response Unit in each state to handle complaints against the police, this is also a check. All these fears are anticipated and taken care of in the bill.
Interestingly, the National Assembly will prescribe national minimum standards on recruitment, training, vetting, promotions, discipline, use of force, firearms, complaints procedures, accountability, data management and professional conduct. States may set higher standards but cannot go below the federal baseline.
Couldn’t there be conflict of interest, especially with regard to possible interference of federal police in state affairs?
The roles of the federal and state police are very clear. The Federal Police Service will retain the performance of national duties, including policing the FCT, protecting federal institutions and assets, and handling counter-terrorism, organised crime, cybercrime, border security, arms trafficking and interstate crimes.
In a similar manner, the State Police Service will enforce state laws, maintain public safety and order, prevent and detect crime within its jurisdiction, protect lives and property and perform other functions prescribed by state law. It cannot operate outside its state except with the National Assembly approval. The federal police may assist state services on request.
In terms of appointment, it is noteworthy that the Federal Police will still be headed by an Inspector-General of Police appointed by the President on the advice of the National Police Council and confirmed by the Senate. Each State Police will be headed by a Commissioner of Police appointed by the governor on the council’s recommendation and confirmed by the state assembly.
Other News
As regards the security of the office of the IGP and CPs, the bill says that both the IGP and CPs can only be removed for stated cause, after a fair hearing, with a two-thirds approval of the Senate or state assembly respectively.
From what I have read, the bill allows temporary federal intervention in a state only where there is a breakdown of public order, the state police is incapable of functioning, there are serious rights violations, electoral intimidation, or a national security threat across state lines.
But such intervention must be temporary and proportionate. The President must authorise it in writing, specify grounds, territory, functions and duration and notify the governor, speaker, National Police Council, and National Assembly within 48 hours. The Senate can cap the duration and courts can review the legality of the action.
Also, of interest is that the legislation provides that current police officers retain their posts, while existing vigilante groups cannot bear arms unless authorised by law. States will gain constitutional power to establish their own police, but only under federal standards and oversight, while governors have operational control through appointed commissioners, but face tight limits on deployment and removal of police chiefs to prevent abuse.
Funding is another issue. What about states grappling with salaries, they may not be able to cope with additional wage and operational bills?
That is one of the demerits. Some governors cannot even pay salaries for teachers and nurses regularly. I know the state police would be one of the essential services in any state. If a governor cannot pay teachers, they must still pay the police. Should a governor face difficulties the Federal Government can step in to help with salaries and other obligations.
The fact is that many governors have been providing operational vehicles to the police for many decades now. These governors also have security votes. Federal allocations to governors have been on the rise for some time now. I think we can be hopeful. Decentralisation of policing will enhance security and welfare of the people; the major reason for the existence of the government.
However, some states can fund the police adequately. That is how it should be done. They can take the initiatives from Lagos State which established Operation Sweep. They demonstrate that it is possible. They have the Lagos State Security Trust Fund (LSSTF), a state of the earth surveillance system as well as a world-class Forensic Analysis Centre. For over 30 years, Lagos has been equipping Operation Sweep with modern vehicles and communication equipment. They even have drones and I think a helicopter for policing. So, the state is ready.
Enugu State also has a state-of-the-art command and control centre, known as Enugu State Digital Surveillance Control Centre, for effective surveillance of the state. The sophisticated security infrastructure which comes with the Centre for DNA is aimed at promoting scientific, evidence-based justice and war against crimes.
I think the IGP was there recently and he confessed his surprise about the existence of such a facility in the state. I worked for Lagos I know we had something like this in Lagos. But the advancement of this one amazed me.
How do you see the upsurge in kidnapping and insecurity on our highways?
These are very disturbing developments, especially at this period in our national history, but we are aware that there is usually an upsurge in such crimes during election season. It is high time the government reviews its strategies in handling this issue of kidnapping. My heart bleeds when we see children being kidnapped for weeks and communities ravaged.
As retired IGPs, we have visited the current IGP and spoken privately. We know he is trying his best. Terrorism is an irregular warfare, and this one has been fuelled largely by the porosity of our borders and influx of criminals from war-torn countries. But I am hopeful that with the regular review of the strategies, success is in sight.
Our highways should be well-policed, there should be regular vehicular patrol, and sometimes, with the support of the Police Air Wing. Police visibility goes a long way to prevent crimes. And that is where this issue of state policing is very timely. The judiciary should also do an effective job in sentencing these criminals while governors should sight the death warrants.
How about the issue of tracking of kidnappers and tracing or ransom payment?
Modern policing is based on technology. Tracking is one of the improvements that technology has made into policing. For instance, how was the U.S. able to identify the locations of those 199 terrorists in Sokoto early in the year and eliminate them? You heard a US security chief last week saying they were not only eliminated but their huge haul of electronic gadgets, three times bigger than any haul retrieved from terrorists since 911 and loaded into an additional aircraft. Today, they are analysing that to see how ISIS communicates with each other and of course to formulate strategies to counter them.
In like manner, the Minister of Interior also revealed last week that using the integrated data management system, they were able to arrest seven terrorist leaders on their way from pilgrimage to Mecca. That is the power of tech. We are getting there.
I have no doubt in my mind that the President is taking some steps to identify their locations and deal with them accordingly. It is just a matter of time. Already, over 800 have been convicted for terrorism and more are currently undergoing trials. The point is all Nigerians, security agencies, civilian JTF and community leaders should join the fight.
The same thing is applicable to tracing ransom payment. This money emanates from the banks, sometimes, we see them with identifiable banknote wrappers. This can be traced and the bandits or kidnappers’ location identified for appropriate military action.
Also, the banks are complicit in this case because under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, the Federal Government officially criminalised the payment of ransoms. It carries 15 years imprisonment and makes the crime of abduction punishable by death in cases where victims die. But from a human point of view, one can sympathise with parents and relation of abductees, because life is not replaceable.
When passed into law, state governors can really assume the role as chief security officers of the state and commissioners who are familiar with the geography, culture, people and crime pattern in the state will take charge. Since every crime is local, the modus of enforcement will now be carried out according to the peculiarities of such crimes and locus and states.
