Arguments continue to trail the hasty approval of the State Police project by the Senate, as stakeholders express worries over the most contentious security reforms in the recent times
By David Oladimeji
On Tuesday, June 23, 2026, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had forwarded a Constitution Alteration Bill to the Upper Chamber of the National Assembly, the Senate, seeking approval for the establishment of the contentious State Police. The Bill which sought to provide legal backing for a decentralized policing structure in the country, as usual, promptly got easy passage in the Senate the following day, Wednesday, June 24, 2026.
During plenary on that Wednesday, the Senate passed a landmark Constitution Amendment Bill establishing state police across the 36 states of the federation.
The passage of the Executive Bill, transmitted to the National Assembly by President Bola Tinubu, officially sets the stage to dismantle the decades-old unitary structure of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), and replace it with a dual policing model, to be identified as the Federal Police Service (FPS) and State Police Service (SPS).
While debate went on, the electronic voting system ran into a technical hitch. For over 30 minutes, the hallowed chamber’s electronic voting system crashed, forcing the lawmakers to adopt the manual method. In an unusual spectacle, all 88 lawmakers present voted by a physical show of hands.
The tension in the chamber was palpable as technical engineers scrambled frantically to revive the voting portals.
As time went on, the Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele, APC, Ekiti Central, moved a motion to ditch the faulty technology.
The motion was swiftly seconded by the Senate Minority Leader, Senator Abba Moro, PDP, Benue South, paving the way for the historic manual show of hands.
To allay fears that state governors would weaponise local police formations against political opponents or ethnic minorities, the passed bill (Sixth Alteration Bill, 2026, SB. 1055) introduced unprecedented constitutional firewalls and stringent accountability metrics.
According to the comprehensive report of the Senate Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution, chaired by Deputy Senate President Jibrin Barau, APC, Kano North, no state can arbitrarily launch its police force unless certified by the National Assembly as meeting rigorous “national minimum standards.”
Crucially, under the newly substituted Section 214 of the Constitution, the Federal Police Service retains absolute monopoly over major security sectors, ensuring that the federal government remains the ultimate custodian of the nation’s territorial integrity. The Federal Police will maintain exclusive jurisdiction over National security, terrorism, and cybercrime; inter-state crimes, arms-trafficking, and international crime syndicates.
The bill clarifies that while state police will manage domestic public safety, they are completely barred from cross-border law enforcement. A State Police Service shall not exercise police powers outside the borders of the state for which it is established, except as specifically authorised by an Act of the National Assembly.
Nigeria’s debate over state police has evolved far beyond a constitutional amendment. It has become a referendum on trust—trust in institutions, trust in governors, and trust in the country’s ability to reform itself without creating fresh problems.
At a time when insecurity continues to stretch the nation’s security architecture, calls for state police have grown louder. Yet with every argument supporting the proposal comes an equally compelling warning against it.
The central question remains deceptively simple: Can a decentralised policing structure make Nigeria safer, or merely decentralise the abuse of power?
Supporters insist that the current policing structure has reached its limits. They argue that a federal police force, operating from Abuja while responding to diverse security threats across 36 states, is no longer adequate for the realities of modern Nigeria.
State governors frequently describe themselves as “chief security officers” of their states. However, they possess little operational authority over police commissioners, creating a contradiction many security experts believe weakens emergency response and accountability.
President Tinubu has consistently expressed support for state policing as part of broader constitutional reforms. His position reflects the belief that Nigeria’s security challenges require structural innovation rather than continued reliance on a heavily centralised model.
The Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) has also repeatedly backed the proposal. The governors argued that policing should be closer to the people, allowing faster intelligence gathering, quicker response to crimes, and greater collaboration with local communities.
Former Inspector-General of Police, Mike Okiro, had maintained that local policing could improve intelligence and operational effectiveness, provided there are strong legal safeguards against political interference.
Security consultant Kabiru Adamu also argued that state police should not be viewed as a miracle solution to insecurity, but as one component of wider security-sector reforms that include better intelligence, technology, funding, and inter-agency cooperation.
On the other side of the debate stand those who believe Nigeria could be opening the door to greater political instability. Their concern is not necessarily the concept itself but the character of those who may control it.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) had consistently argued that if state police was eventually adopted, it must operate under clear constitutional limitations, judicial oversight, independent complaints mechanisms, and transparent recruitment standards to prevent abuse.
Civil rights advocates, including the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), have warned that without robust oversight institutions, state police could become instruments of political intimidation rather than public protection.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo had previously cautioned that any policing reform must strengthen professionalism and national unity rather than deepen political divisions or ethnic loyalties.
Critics also pointed to Nigeria’s political culture. They argued that institutions often reflect the quality of leadership managing them. A poorly governed state police service, they warned, could easily become an extension of partisan politics.
Funding remains another unresolved obstacle. Several states struggle to meet salary obligations, raising legitimate concerns about whether they possess the financial capacity to maintain modern police organisations equipped with adequate training, technology, welfare, and operational logistics.
Beyond finances lies the issue of professionalism. A fragmented policing system without uniform standards could produce unequal law enforcement across states, potentially weakening public confidence in justice and human rights protections. Many critics of a hasty state police implementation without adequate safeguards and proper training and management, argued that a badly trained police is worse than an armed robber. They also argued that during recruitment exercise, politicians would convert their political thugs to state police operatives.
Yet proponents countered that fear should not become an excuse for inaction. They argued that institutional safeguards—not institutional paralysis—are the proper response to legitimate concerns about abuse.
Perhaps, the greatest lesson from this prolonged national conversation is that policing cannot be separated from governance. A police force, whether federal or state-controlled, is only as effective as the political and legal institutions that regulate it.
The debate therefore exposes a deeper national dilemma. Nigeria is simultaneously searching for stronger security, genuine federalism, accountable leadership, and resilient democratic institutions. State police sits at the intersection of all four aspirations.
Ultimately, the controversy surrounding state police is less about uniforms, patrol vehicles, or command structures than it is about confidence in governance itself. Experts argued that if Nigeria succeeds in building transparent safeguards, professional standards, and effective oversight, state police could become a transformative reform. If it fails, the country risks replacing one imperfect security structure with thirty-six new centres of controversy.
The future of the proposal, therefore, depends not merely on constitutional amendments but on the political will to place the rule of law above the pursuit of power.
Worries Trail Senate’s Approval Of State Police
Many experts and stakeholders have expressed worry and fear over possible shortcomings of the state police architecture. The fear compelled the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Afam Osigwe to insist that the Federal Government should allow conversations around the subject before its final implementation.
A retired Commissioner of Police, Balarabe Sule, warned that the noble security goals of state police could crash on the hard rocks of financial insolvency across many states of the Federation.
Sule pointed out that many states currently struggle to pay the national minimum wage, arguing that creating under-funded, poorly-equipped armed units would be a direct recipe for catastrophic institutional corruption.
According to Sule, who expressed his feelings in Calabar, Cross River State recently, “I can very well tell you that many states will not have the resources to equip and pay remuneration for those to be employed to function effectively.
“In addition, there will be no uniformity in the operations of the personnel across the federation. You don’t expect an officer, who is not well paid and equipped to perform optimally. This is where corruption will arise. Definitely, when you don’t pay them well and as at when due, they will be exposed to corruption.
“Again, I also fear that state police will be subject to abuse by governors who pay them irrespective of the checks and balances. You don’t expect an officer who is not well paid and equipped to perform optimally. This is where corruption will arise”.
Even politicians are affected by the fear of the establishment of state police not carefully planned and implemented. The New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) and the Conference of United Political Parties (CUPP), expressed grave concerns over the timing of the legislation, coming just ahead of the next general election cycle.
The CUPP criticised the Federal Government over passage of the Bill, describing it as a hasty reform amid the administration’s failure to strengthen the Nigeria Police Force (NPF).
The acting National Chairman of CUPP, Chief Peter Ameh, argued that Nigeria continues to grapple with severe insecurity, including banditry, kidnapping, insurgency, farmer-herder clashes, communal violence, and urban crime. He added that the NPF has been critically overstretched and under-resourced.
Ameh said: “Despite repeated promises by the Tinubu administration to massively recruit and adequately fund the police, including announcements of recruiting tens of thousands of officers and enhancing the Police Trust Fund, these commitments have not been fulfilled to the required scale or with the urgency needed.”
“We caution that poorly implemented State Police could be vulnerable to abuse, including political weaponisation, election interference, or suppression of opposition”.
The NNPP National Secretary, Dipo Olayoku, while conceding that federal policing has proven incapable of addressing sophisticated modern crimes, warned against the hasty deployment of state forces without a clinical filtering mechanism.
Olayoku said, “Efforts must be put in place to ensure it is not abused by state governors. The 2027 general elections are just around the corner, we must ensure governors don’t pack their political thugs into the State Police, thereby using uniforms to harass opponents.”
On its part, the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), insisted that Tinubu’s government lacked the moral capital to midwife such a sensitive, far-reaching institutional shift.
The National Chairman of the PRP, Dr. Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, stated flatly: “This administration lacks the moral assets and the trust of Nigerians to undertake a major shift in the policing structure of the country. The All Progressives Congress administration has failed to manage our existing security structure. Its plan to engineer the emergence of State Police is suspicious.
“The PRP is deeply concerned about plans by President Tinubu’s administration to procure State Police through constitutional amendment at a time when its credibility and competence are at an unprecedented low level in our democratic history.
“Going by precedent and record, this administration will almost certainly secure what is needed to amend the constitution and actualise its desire to establish State Police.
“While Nigeria needs major review and overhaul of its security, and law and order institutions to address national security and create an environment that should raise citizens’ confidence and faith in leaders and critical institutions, this administration lacks the moral assets and the trust of Nigerians to undertake a major shift in the policing structure of the country,” Baba-Ahmed said.
According to Senator Ayodele Arise, who represented Ekiti North (2007-2011), the National Assembly must quickly input tighter checks and balances. He suggested that the appointment of a state Commissioner of Police must involve a state police commission sending three names to the governor, subject to rigorous legislative screening and ratification by the state House of Assembly.
Arise said, “Yes, many of the objections are legitimate concerns. It is our responsibility to ensure that we put a few checks and balances here and there that will curtail the excessiveness of any leader or governor to use the Police against the people.
A prominent lawyer and social commentator, Dr. Monday Ubani, SAN, posited that the entire state police experiment is doomed to fail unless the foundational local government system is completely overhauled and granted financial autonomy.
Speaking on the subject, Barrister Ubani said, “The mere transfer of policing powers from the Federal Government to state governments does not automatically translate into effective grassroots security. The local government is constitutionally designed to be closest to the people. Without strong institutions and grassroots structures, the country risks merely decentralising existing security problems rather than solving them.
“The passage of the State Police Bill represents a major milestone in Nigeria’s quest to create a more responsive, efficient and community-oriented security framework,” he said.
