Politics
On State Police And Nigeria’s Polity
There are esoteric reasons in the current prolonged agitations for state police, or otherwise. That is, beyond the known reasons given by different individuals and groups. A critical scrutiny of all the views expressed so far reveals unanimity in several areas regarding the importance of state police.
For one, the agitations, no matter the stand, have revealed that more Nigerians have become interested in governance. What this means is that more people are becoming more knowledgeable in the affairs of government to the point of making their own contributions. Whether such contribution is inconsequential is talk for another day.
But the truth is Nigerians have become more familiar with the intricacies of democracy after years of military dictatorship. The question thus is how prepared are the privileged few in governance to making the same adjustments as the majority of Nigerians?
Another area of agreement among all contributors to the state police saga is that the Federal Police has failed irrevocably in its responsibility to protect the lives and properties of Nigerians. Hence, the most pressing need for a way forward.
It is based on this agreement that the Governor’s Forum, which has become a very important arm of government, deemed it necessary to come up with the idea of a state police that would be under the direct control of governors, who are the chief security officers of the 36 federating states.
This agreement, ironically, turned out to be the point of disagreement, first among the governors, and later the rest of the schooled Nigerian public.
While governors in the southern part of the country are for the establishment of state police, because they believe it is the solution to the worsening security situation in the country, their colleagues from the north think differently.
To them, Nigeria is not ripe for a state police. They thus align with the Presidency, which has minced no words in its stand that the country still has a long way to go before it can effectively contain regional policing. Both of them have allies in former Inspectors-General of Police (IGPs), who in a recent meeting with the Presidency said state police would amount to “an invitation for anarchy”.
In the words of a human rights activist, Shehu Sani, the reason behind the opposition of the northern state governors to state police are numerous. Among them are the fear of a repeat of the brutality it used against the opposition during the colonial era in the north, and the possibility of some governors using it to enhance their secessionist tendencies.
“During the colonial time, the local police were directly under the emirate system referred to as Native Authority. At that time, they were brutally used against members of the opposition”, Sani said.
He continued that “They arrested people like late Hijiya Gambo Sawaba, then woman leader of late Aminu Kano’s party, Northern Element Progressive Union (NEPU) for no other reason than being a member of the opposition…
“If you look at what the Sharia police (Hisbah) are doing today at Kano and Zamfara, it is similar to what the Native Police did in the First Republic. Even though the Hisbah set up by the state governments claim to be enforcing Sharia law, they are used against people who criticize governors and their policies. Governors also use Hisbah to rig local government elections.”
The second key reason, according to Sani is that the North’s opposition “has to do with the event that led to the build up to the civil war. There is very strong fear that if the state police are allowed, some states’ secessionist ambition could arm the state police through the back door with weapons, which could lead to the breakup of the country.”
One of the former IGPs, Mike Okiro, made the same anti-decentralisation argument during a recent meeting of the South-South Peoples’ Assembly held in Delta State. According to him, “State police cannot help the country. We have tried it before in this country under the regional governments and it did not work.
“It is clear that state governors will misuse it if we go back to state police. They will use it against their political opponents, and I think in a democracy, people should be given the freedom to exercise their rights.” This stand has obviously been a common feature of the anti-state police perspective.
As elder Statesman and leader of Ijaw nation, Chief Edwin Clark puts it, “I don’t believe in state police, even though it is an essential ingredient of democracy. Nigeria as of today is not developed democratically to the extent of having a state police.
“The way the state governors behave has not made it necessary to have a state police. Some of the governors behave like dictators and there is this fear that they will use the state police for their political interests such as political thuggery,
“The governors are the chief security officers of their respective states and with state police, they will acquire the powers of life and death, where they will use it at their beck and call to intimidate and cajole their political enemies.
“At the right time, when the democratic practice is matured, state police can be introduced, but certainly not now. I will rather advocate the reformation of the Nigeria Police,” he explained.
Clark further argued that it was curious that some states that are yet to pay the minimum wage of #18,000.00 are among the advocates of the creation of the state police. He reasoned that if they are unable to pay the minimum wage of #18, 000.00 in a situation where the least paid police man earns about #30,000.00, where would they get the money to fund the police?
The implication of this leitmotif stand of the anti-state police is that the Federal Government is more mature and hence more capable to use the police for the good of all than the state governors.
However, former Lagos State Police Commissioner, Mr. Young Arebamen (rtd), disagrees with this perspective. He says the security challenges have grown beyond the competence of a centralised police and advised the Fedral Government not to politicise the issue.
“I can’t understand why some people are afraid of state police, if we have done something for 50 years and we still have problem of insecurity in the system, it is high time we began to think differently… if you eat eba that contained poison in the 60s, will you because of that stop taking eba? The answer is no. all you need to do is to avoid poison”, he said.
How to do this in the present state police saga, he explained, is to institute a control mechanism: “control measure should be spelt out in the constitution to avoid abuse of state police by state governors. We should learn lessons from history and proffer solutions for today and tomorrow”
In buttressing his position further, Arebamen noted that even in the present status quo, the state governments “are mostly responsible for the material and financial needs of the Federal Police”.
He said the governors as chief security officers of the states provide the police with patrol vehicles, maintain and fuel the vehicles, in addition to providing bullet proof vests, arms and ammunition, telecommunication gadgets, and also pay special allowances to those serving in the anti-crime squads.
“We should take politics out of security problems and face the reality of the time”, he concluded.
Unfortunately, this is where Shehu Sani totally disagrees when he noted that “The (governors) have bastardised the local government system, pocketed the states legislature and consistently manipulated elections to their favour, and at the same time looting the state treasury.
“If they have proved incapable, dubious and dishonest in handling those institutions, is self destruction for anyone to think that they can perform magic with state police”.
Even he, however, agrees that state police is necessary, “but the advocates should (first) come out with measures that will make it impossible for state authorities to manipulate”.
One way to do this, he said, is not just “creating layers of security and multiplicity of state apparatus, but ensuring that social justice and economic opportunities are abound for all Nigerians”.
This, obviously, is an unequivocal challenge for government to not only come up with a dispassionate constitution at all levels of governance, but also ensure that such constitution is followed to the letter in terms of application.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, December 31, 2025, and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mr Obiora Ifoh, the party said it had taken note of Mr Obi’s defection alongside some of his supporters, as well as what it called a “lacklustre speech” delivered by the former Anambra State governor at the defection event.
“We wondered what new he intends to sell to Nigerians,” the party said, adding that it was not surprised by the move, having “since September 2024, parted ways with Peter Obi and some of his blind supporters in the National Assembly.”
According to the statement, the faction said it had patiently awaited Mr Obi’s exit, describing it as a blessing.
“The party is finally liberated by this defection and as party leaders, we count it as a blessing,” the party said.
The faction further disclosed that it had previously urged Mr Obi and his supporters to leave if they were unable to work with the party leadership.
It claimed that several lawmakers had been suspended for anti-party activities and that similar action would have been taken against Mr Obi but for the intervention of “some well-meaning Nigerians.”
It also blamed its internal crisis on Mr Obi and Abia State Governor, Dr. Alex Otti, accusing them of sponsoring what it described as an insurrection against the Julius Abure-led leadership.
“The crisis we had in the Labour Party was caused by Peter Obi and the Abia State governor, Alex Otti,” the statement alleged, adding that it was surprising Dr Otti had not followed Mr Obi out of the party despite his suspension.
Reacting to Mr Obi’s defection event in Enugu, the faction claimed the gathering was largely boycotted by prominent political and traditional institutions in the South East, insisting that those present were “political spent forces who cannot win in their wards should there be an election today.”
It warned that this development signalled the failure of any future Mr Obi presidential or vice-presidential ambition, claiming he had “clearly lost the charm that had endeared him to the people prior to 2023.”
The faction also accused Mr Obi of misleading the South East during the 2023 elections, alleging that the region suffers political marginalisation under President Bola Tinubu’s administration as a result.
“He must be told that the South East lost out completely in President Ahmed Tinubu’s government because they trusted and believed in him in 2023,” the statement said, alleging disparities in ministerial appointments and infrastructure allocation to the zone.
The Abure-Led LP apologised to Nigerians for its decision in the last election.
“We gave Nigerians a candidate we thought was good for the nation in 2023, but time has since proved that we made the greatest political mistake. We plead for forgiveness from Nigerians,” the party said.
It urged Nigerians to watch out for a rebranded Labour Party, promising to present “the best prospect” capable of returning Nigeria to what it described as its “glorious days.”
steadily toward unity, justice, and shared prosperity”, he said.
Speaking to journalists on Wednesday at his country home in Ikere-Ekiti, Dr Oluyede said the development came as a shock, stressing that INEC supervised and monitored the PDP governorship primary that produced him as the party’s candidate.
According to him, INEC officials documented the process, completed all required forms, and even affirmed his candidacy in court through sworn affidavits arising from cases linked to the primary election.
He maintained that no court order or injunction currently restrains INEC from listing his name as the PDP candidate, arguing that the electoral body lacks the constitutional power to determine who emerges as a party’s nominee.
Dr Oluyede described such decisions as the exclusive responsibility of political parties, not the electoral umpire.
While playing down panic over the released list, Dr Oluyede noted that electoral processes often involve reviews and corrections.
He disclosed that he had commenced wide consultations, including engagements with PDP leadership and formal correspondence with INEC, to seek clarification on the omission and determine the next line of action.
The PDP candidate assured his supporters across Ekiti State that he would appear on the ballot, expressing confidence that the situation would be resolved in his favour.
He described attempts to exclude candidates from elections as dangerous and undemocratic, warning that such tactics undermine the people’s right to freely choose their leaders.
Dr Oluyede called on the people of Ekiti to reject any form of disenfranchisement, insisting that elections should be contests of ideas, records, and acceptance by the electorate rather than exclusionary maneuvers.
He also declared that the PDP in Ekiti had resolved its past internal crises and was now united, focused, and ready to win the forthcoming governorship election.
He urged party members and supporters to remain calm and focused, expressing optimism that, with divine grace and the will of the people, the PDP would emerge victorious at the polls.
Mr Obi spoke while formally declaring for the African Democratic Congress (ADC) at a well-attended event in Enugu on Wednesday, where he outlined what he described as a fresh roadmap for rescuing the country from its socio-economic challenges.
Addressing party members, supporters and other stakeholders, the former governor stressed that leadership must be driven by integrity and accountability, warning against the culture of double standards in public office.
“We cannot continue to deceive our people. Leadership is about telling the truth and leading by example. You cannot promise one thing in public and do another in private. That is not leadership, and that is not the change Nigeria needs”, Mr Obi said.
He maintained that genuine national rebirth would only be possible if entrenched wrongs were corrected, adding that governance must be guided by competence, discipline and a clear sense of purpose.
Mr Obi also underscored the need for fresh thinking in the nation’s political space, urging political actors to move away from recycled ideas that have failed to deliver sustainable development.
“We must come with new ideas,” he said, adding that “Nigeria’s problems are not mysterious; what has been lacking is the courage and competence to address them differently. We need a new approach that puts people first and focuses on production, not consumption.”
Calling for a broad based political collaboration, Mr Obi appealed to parties and stakeholders across ideological divides to work together in the national interest.
“This country is bigger than any party or individual. All parties must come together to change the present trend. What matters is not the platform, but the future of Nigeria and the wellbeing of its citizens”, he declared.
Looking ahead to the 2027 general elections, Mr Obi challenged aspirants seeking elective offices to ensure transparency in their credentials, warning that the era of falsified certificates was drawing to a close.
“Anyone contesting for any position in 2027 must come with genuine certificates. All the machinery is now in place to verify what is genuine and what is not. Integrity must start from the very foundation of leadership”, he stated.
Drawing lessons from international development models, Mr Obi cited Rwanda and Indonesia as examples of countries that rose from difficult beginnings to become thriving economies through disciplined leadership and sound policies.
“These countries were once behind us,” he noted, adding that “Today, they are moving ahead because they chose competent leadership, clear vision and policies that support local production and human capital development.”
He also criticised the economic policies of the present administration, particularly the continued importation of food items that can be produced locally, describing such practices as inimical to national development.
“You cannot grow an economy by killing local production. Importing food that we can produce in Nigeria destroys jobs, weakens our farmers and drains our foreign exchange. A serious country must produce what it consumes”, he argued.
The event featured renewed calls from ADC supporters for sustained engagement and mobilisation, as Mr Obi reiterated his belief that Nigeria remains redeemable if led with honesty, competence and a commitment to shared national progress.
In his remarks, the National Chairman of the ADC, Senator David Mark, expressed confidence in the emerging coalition, assuring Nigerians that the party would deliver good governance at all levels of administration if entrusted with power.
The gathering also witnessed the defection of several prominent politicians from different political parties across the South-East and beyond.
The motion endorsing the defection was moved by a former Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chief Emeka Ihedioha, and seconded by former economic adviser to ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Prof. Osita Ogbu.
Goodwill messages from notable political figures, including Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, Mrs. Aisha Yesufu, Chief Sam Egwu, Dr. Okwesilieze Nwodo, Chief Achike Udenwa, Mr Onyema Ugochukwu and Senator Gilbert Nnaji among others, further underscored the growing momentum within the ADC.
-
Featured4 days agoFubara Redeploys Green As Commissioner For Justice
-
Sports1 day agoAFCON ’25: Osimhen Not Worried By Yekini Comparison, Pressure
-
Politics1 day agoYou Have No Power To Drop Me, Ekiti PDP Candidate Tells INEC
-
Business1 day agoKALCCIMA PROMISES KALABARI ECONOMIC GROWTH, INAUGURATES NEW EXECUTIVES
-
Sports1 day agoOgoni Nation Cup : Coach Praise Players In spite 2-0 Loss
-
Sports1 day agoRemo Stars set for Ikenne return
-
Sports1 day agoChelsea Set To Part Ways With Maresca?
-
Sports1 day agoSoname Calls For NPFL referees demotion
