State Police Bill Clears Senate as Governors Gain Powers to Appoint Commissioners

By: Oluwaseun M. Lawal

A major shift may be coming to Nigeria’s security architecture.

On Wednesday, the Senate took a significant step toward changing how policing works across the country. After a lengthy debate and clause-by-clause consideration, lawmakers voted in favour of a constitutional amendment bill that seeks to establish state police services alongside the existing federal police structure.

The chamber was unusually attentive. Governors, presidential aides, attorneys-general and other high-ranking officials watched from the gallery as senators weighed what many have described as one of the most consequential security reforms in decades.

When the voting eventually began, the outcome was clear.

More than the constitutionally required two-thirds majority supported the proposal, paving the way for the next stage of the amendment process. Senate President Godswill Akpabio announced the passage shortly afterwards, drawing applause from supporters of the measure.

For years, conversations around state policing have remained controversial. Some argued that Nigeria’s security challenges have outgrown a fully centralised policing system. Others feared that state-controlled police could become political tools in the hands of powerful governors.

The new bill attempts to strike a balance between those competing concerns.

If eventually enacted, every state would be allowed to operate its own police service while the Federal Police Service continues to function nationwide. The two systems would run side by side, each with defined responsibilities.

One of the most talked-about provisions centres on who controls the state police structure.

Under the proposal, a state’s police service would be led by a Commissioner of Police appointed by the governor. However, the appointment would not become effective until it receives confirmation from the State House of Assembly.

Governors would also have the authority to issue written directives to state police commissioners on matters concerning public safety and public order. Supporters say this could improve responsiveness to local security threats. Critics, however, have raised concerns about possible abuse.

Perhaps anticipating those fears, lawmakers included safeguards.

The bill expressly states that a state police commissioner cannot arrest, detain, investigate or deploy force against an individual, political party or organisation simply for criticising a government. Any action taken must be backed by existing laws and due process.

In addition, both the Inspector-General of Police and state commissioners would have the right to challenge directives they consider unlawful. Such disputes could be reviewed by the relevant Police Service Commission, while the courts would retain their powers to adjudicate on any disagreement.

The legislation also makes it more difficult for governors to arbitrarily remove police commissioners.

A commissioner may only be suspended or removed for stated reasons and after due process has been followed. The proposal requires recommendations from the National Police Council and approval by at least two-thirds of members of the state’s House of Assembly before such removal can take effect.

Another section of the bill addresses a sensitive issue that has generated debate in recent years — regional security outfits.

Across Nigeria, various states and regions have established local security groups such as Amotekun, Ebube Agu and Hisbah to fill security gaps. While these organisations have become familiar in many communities, the proposed law makes it clear that they will not automatically transform into state police agencies.

In fact, the bill specifically provides that existing vigilante, neighbourhood, traffic and community security outfits cannot exercise police powers or carry firearms unless expressly authorised under the Constitution and federal legislation.

That provision means many of these groups would need fresh legal backing before assuming any formal policing role.

The Senate also included circumstances under which the Federal Police Service can step into state policing operations.

Federal intervention may occur if a state police service becomes unable to maintain public order, suffers serious operational failures, or is allegedly being used to violate fundamental rights. Intervention may also happen where there is a threat to national security, territorial integrity, or public safety beyond a state’s borders.

In some situations, a governor may even request federal assistance directly.

Still, the bill emphasises that such intervention should not be open-ended. Any federal takeover must be temporary, proportionate and limited to addressing the specific crisis that triggered it.

The President would be required to authorise the intervention and clearly define its scope, purpose and duration. Relevant authorities, including the state governor, state assembly, National Police Council and National Assembly, must also be notified within 48 hours.

The journey is far from over though.

With Senate approval secured, the proposal now moves to the House of Representatives. Should the lower chamber endorse it, the amendment will then be transmitted to the 36 State Houses of Assembly.

For the constitutional change to become law, at least 24 state legislatures must vote in support.

That next phase may prove just as important as Wednesday’s Senate vote.

For now, however, advocates of state policing have something they have waited years to see — real legislative movement. Whether the reform ultimately reshapes security across Nigeria or sparks fresh political debates remains to be seen. But one thing is certain. The conversation is no longer theoretical. It has moved firmly into the realm of lawmaking.