The Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre, RULAAC, has expressed concerned by recent claims that making state police funding a first-line charge in the Constitution will, by itself, shield state police services from political interference by state governors.
While financial autonomy is an important institutional safeguard, Nigeria’s experience demonstrates that constitutional guarantees alone do not automatically translate into genuine operational independence or accountability, said the center in a statement on Thursday.
“The judiciary, for instance, enjoys constitutional protection through a first-line charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Yet, judicial officers and institutions have continued to complain about delays in the release of funds, executive control over administrative processes, procurement bottlenecks, and other forms of financial and institutional dependence. Similarly, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), despite its constitutional status, has at different times raised concerns over delayed or inadequate release of funds for critical electoral activities.
“These experiences show that constitutional funding arrangements, while desirable, are not sufficient safeguards against political interference.
According to the body, the debate on state police should therefore go beyond funding. Fundamental questions remain unanswered:
– Who will control recruitment, promotions and discipline?
– Who will appoint and remove State Commissioners of Police?
– What mechanisms will protect officers who refuse unlawful political directives?
– What independent oversight institutions will investigate complaints against state police?
– How will citizens obtain effective remedies for abuses?
– How will conflicts between federal and state policing powers be resolved?
– What safeguards exist against the capture of state police by governors, political parties, wealthy interests, criminal networks, or other powerful actors?
These are issues that cannot be resolved merely by creating a constitutionally guaranteed funding mechanism.
It said equally troubling is the apparent absence of broad public engagement on a constitutional reform of this magnitude. The establishment of state police would fundamentally alter Nigeria’s security architecture and significantly affect the rights and freedoms of citizens. Such a far-reaching proposal should not be advanced without comprehensive public consultations and transparent legislative scrutiny.
RULAAC therefore calls on the National Assembly to:
1. Publish the full State Police Bill and all proposed constitutional amendments for public review.
2. Conduct comprehensive public hearings in all geopolitical zones, allowing citizens, civil society organisations, professional bodies, security experts, traditional institutions, labour unions, and other stakeholders to make meaningful contributions.
3. Subject every proposed safeguard to rigorous public examination rather than relying on assurances from political office holders.
4. Consider alternative reforms to strengthen community-oriented policing, accountability, operational decentralisation, and resource allocation within the Nigeria Police Force before embarking on a constitutional restructuring whose long-term implications have not been adequately debated.
Nigeria needs effective policing that is professional, accountable, rights-respecting, and responsive to local security challenges. Achieving that objective requires more than constitutional guarantees of funding. It demands strong institutions, independent oversight, transparent governance, and broad public confidence.
The National Assembly owes Nigerians a transparent, participatory, and evidence-based constitutional reform process. Nothing less will suffice on a matter as consequential as the creation of state police.
