State police: A need for quality legislation, prompt implementation

The most ambitious reform effort in Nigeria’s recent policing structuring is being recorded. On June 11, 2026 the two chambers of Nigeria’s National Assembly, the House or Representatives and Senate, made remarkable progress in the Tinubu Adminstration’s desire to decentralise Nigeria’s current federal policing structure. The bill as passed by the House of Representatives has gone a long way to assuage some of our concerns regarding decentralised policing including risk of abuse and that state governors might use police forces for political repression or personal protection; funding and standards as many states lack the fiscal capacity to maintain professional police forces and that national training and equipment standards could become fragmented; and ethnic/religious tensions, where localised police might exacerbate communal conflicts rather than resolve them. However, there remains legitimate fears that are rooted in Nigeria’s governance realities and the history of security institutions being weaponised or under-resourced.

I have shifted from primarily highlighting risks to recognising the strong political momentum and practical necessity for state police, especially given the adaptive threats we face of insurgency, banditry, kidnappings, farmer-herder conflicts, ethnic militias, cultism and intercommunity violence. Local knowledge, faster response times, and improved grassroots intelligence are real advantages if the structures are designed and resourced correctly.

In the House of Representatives, it voted overwhelmingly in favour of a bill on the necessary constitutional amendments required to achieve a decentralised policing structure. The proposed amendments cover the establishment of a federal police and a state police (New Section 214) with a ttransition plan and delineated roles of the executive and legislative arms of government; the responsibilities of the two police structures and non-Interference and safeguard against federal overreach (Section 214); leadership and command (New Section 215); removal of top officers (New Section 216), funding support (New Section 216A); National Police Council (restructured and renamed from the old Nigeria Police Council; new composition and expanded functions in Third Schedule, State Police Service Commission (new body established for each State in Third Schedule, Part II) and the Legislative Framework (Second Schedule – Concurrent Legislative List) as well as other related changes including updates to various constitutional provisions (e.g., Sections 34, 35, 39, 42, 84, 89, 129, 153) to replace references to “Nigeria Police Force” with appropriate “Police”, “Federal Police”, or “State Police” terminology, exclusive legislative list adjustments (e.g., light arms for policing purposes; fingerprints/biometrics/forensics shared with State Police; Federal Police listed separately) and consequential amendments to the Third Schedule for the new bodies and their compositions/powers.

The Senate also made progress when it considered for second reading Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Sixth Alteration) Bill, 2026. The Senate agreed in principle to the bill’s objectives, which is to amend the constitution to decentralise police powers, allowing each state to create and manage its own police force. The lead debater, Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele (who was the bill sponsor) argued that current centralised police system struggles with localised threats such as banditry, kidnapping, farmer-herder clashes etc and that State police would improve intelligence gathering and response times. He cited successful federal models in the United States and Germany among others. The senate referred to the Senate Committee on Constitution Review for detailed scrutiny. As a constitutional amendment, final plenary vote postponed to July 2026 to allow for committee report and ensure required quorum. Legally the bill will require approval of at least two-thirds of Nigeria’s 36 state Houses of Assembly to become law.

In my view, the constitutional amendment is a necessary foundation, but it is not sufficient on its own. Success will be determined by the quality and speed of the implementing legislation, particularly the National Assembly’s Act prescribing detailed minimum standards,  and the political will to enforce professionalism, independence, and accountability at both federal and state levels.

Critics’ concerns have been partially but not yet sufficiently addressed by the guardrails inserted in the bill. The bill introduces important framework safeguards that directly speak to some of the risks. Some of these guardrails include:

No state police formation can commence operations until it is established by a law passed by the relevant State House of Assembly and certified as meeting national minimum standards prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly. This certification requirement, backed by the Federal Police Service Commission’s oversight role, is a critical guardrail against the creation of substandard or rogue forces.

The mechanism allowing a State Commissioner of Police to refer a gubernatorial directive he or she considers unlawful or inconsistent with professional policing standards to the Nigeria Police Council — whose decision is final and binding, which provides a meaningful check against blatant political abuse.

Federal intervention in state policing matters is now constitutionally limited to cases of complete breakdown of law and order, upon a governor’s request, or where a state force is incapacitated by administrative, financial, or operational challenges. This respects federalism while retaining a national backstop.

The bill also provides for regulation of equipment, forensic systems, biometric databases, and information-sharing , areas that can help address equipment standardisation and interoperability if properly implemented.

These are genuine improvements over the previous unitary structure and reflect lessons from years of advocacy for decentralised, intelligence-driven, and community-responsive policing.

However, significant gaps remain that mean the core fears have not been fully allayed:

Abuse and politicisation: While the referral mechanism to the Nigeria Police Council is welcome, its effectiveness will depend entirely on the independence, composition, and resourcing of that body, as well as the detailed rules in the forthcoming National Minimum Standards Act and state-level legislation. Without strong, independent State Police Service Commissions (with civil society, professional, and retired judicial representation) and robust, accessible complaints and accountability mechanisms, the risk of governors using state police against political opponents or for narrow interests persists.

Financing: The bill leaves primary funding responsibility to the states through their own laws. Given the stark disparities in state revenues and fiscal capacity, this is a major unresolved vulnerability. Underfunded forces risk becoming ineffective, corrupt, or reliant on informal/illegal revenue sources. The bill’s recognition of “financial challenges” as a trigger for federal intervention is pragmatic but reactive. We need proactive, sustainable funding architecture, potentially including performance-linked federal grants or dedicated mechanisms, to prevent a two-tier system where some states have professional forces and others have token or predatory ones.

Equipment and operational capacity: National minimum standards can (and should) cover equipment specifications, training curricula, recruitment standards, use-of-force protocols, ammunition accountability, and technological capabilities. This is positive. However, standards on paper do not automatically translate into acquisition, maintenance, or equitable access. Poorer states will face real difficulties procuring and sustaining quality equipment, vehicles, communications, and forensics without technical and material support. We must also guard against the proliferation risks that come with poorly controlled arms and ammunition in multiple state forces.

What is now required is deliberate, inclusive work to craft robust minimum standards that cover merit-based recruitment, rigorous and rights-respecting training, clear command and tenure protections for commissioners, strict arms accountability, intelligence-sharing protocols with federal agencies, and genuine community policing orientation.

We also need a realistic funding and capacity-support framework, particularly for states with limited resources, and stronger integration into a coherent national security architecture.

In conclusion, what is important is a strong monitoring and evaluation structure by both the National Assembly, the presidency and the subnationals, perhaps through the Nigeria Governors Forum. A good approach will be for each of these levels to have relevant committee of experts and practice including risk managers to ensure implementation.

Dr Adamu, Managing Director, Beacon Security and Innovations Limited (BSIL),

Abuja

UPDATE NEWS:

Nigerians can now invest ₦2.5 million on premium domains and profit about ₦17-₦25 million. All earnings paid in US Dollars. Rather than wonder, click here to find out how it works.