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.
Politics
Hoodlums Disrupt LP-ADC Defection Event In Lagos
The event, jointly organised by LP and ADC to publicly acknowledge the movement of party members, was first scheduled to hold at the LP secretariat in Idimu.
However, chaos erupted when more than 100 suspected thugs reportedly stormed the premises, forcing party members and officials to flee.
Eyewitnesses said the attackers, some armed with knives, canes and other dangerous objects, assaulted individuals they encountered during the invasion.
The assailants were also heard chanting hostile slogans, declaring that LP and ADC were not welcome in Lagos State.
Several party members sustained injuries in the process, while party property, including furniture and flags, were vandalised.
Despite the disruption, officials of both parties quickly relocated the programme to an alternative venue, the Eco Centre Event Hall in Egbeda, in a bid to continue the ceremony.
Speaking on the incident, the LP Chairman in Alimosho, Mr Olanrewaju Olushola, popularly known as Heritage, condemned the attack, describing it as unprovoked and alarming, especially with the 2027 general elections approaching.
“What is most painful is that most of my members sustained varying degrees of wounds. This is in spite of the hoodlums going into our party secretariat in Alimosho and destroying our furniture and flags,” he said.
Mr Olushola clarified that the defection itself had already taken place, stressing that Saturday’s gathering was merely a symbolic ceremony to inform the public of their decision.
According to him, nearly all LP members in Alimosho, including the party’s leadership structure, had collectively agreed to move to the ADC.
Also speaking, the party’s Secretary in Alimosho, Mr Moses Akujuobi, explained that plans for an open defection ceremony had earlier been halted by the police, who cited the absence of formal approval.
He said the organisers had reached out to the Area M Commander, ACP Abaniwonda, who reportedly informed them that only the Commissioner of Police could authorise political events in the state.
“Incidentally, we could not reach the CP, but we informed the DSS, after which we went ahead since it wasn’t a rally but a quiet ceremony,” Mr Akujuobi said.
He added that the situation became more tense upon arrival at the initial venue.
“When we got to the venue this morning, we were shocked to see police vans with heavily armed policemen. They informed us that we cannot hold the event and referred us to the police commissioner.
“While we were at it, the hoodlums besieged the place and began to beat people, leading to our deserting the venue,” he explained.
Mr Akujuobi said party officials subsequently contacted members by phone to proceed to the second venue in Egbeda, where the programme resumed briefly.
“We, however, began to contact our members through phones to move to the second venue, which is the Eco Event Centre, and everyone witnessed what took place here.
“The hoodlums got wind of our second venue and equally attacked us, beating up our members again,” he added.
He noted that the decision to defect to the ADC was driven by internal leadership challenges within the Labour Party and protracted legal disputes affecting the party.
Shortly after the hoodlums vacated the second venue, several police vans carrying armed officers reportedly arrived at the location.
Politics
PFN Rejects Call For INEC Chairman’s Removal Over Genocide Comments
The Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) has strongly rejected calls by the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria seeking the removal of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Amupitan, over comments he allegedly made on genocide.
The Fellowship described the demand as unjustified and a threat to constitutional freedoms.
In a statement signed by its National Secretary, Bishop David Bakare, the PFN insisted that Prof Amupitan, like every Nigerian, has the constitutional right to express his views on matters of national concern, irrespective of the public office he occupies.
According to the PFN, the comments attributed to the INEC Chairman were made in his personal capacity and had no link whatsoever with his official responsibilities or electoral duties.
The Fellowship stressed that elections and electoral activities were not involved in the matter, arguing that there was no basis to connect the alleged comments to Prof Amupitan’s role as INEC Chairman.
“We strongly oppose such calls because Prof. Amupitan, as a Nigerian, has the right to make comments on what he observes to be happening in the nation, regardless of his appointment or assignment,” the statement read.
The PFN said it condemned “in every ramification” the suggestion that the INEC Chairman should be removed from office on the basis of his personal views, warning against attempts to punish public officials for expressing opinions outside the scope of their official duties.
The Tide source reports that the Fellowship also cautioned against what it described as a growing tendency to interpret national issues through religious lenses, noting that such an approach only deepens divisions and undermines peaceful coexistence.
“We must resist the temptation of profiling or judging people based on their religious beliefs or positions. Prof. Amupitan has a right to bear his mind, and this should not be at the cost of his job,” the PFN added.
The PFN called on all stakeholders to exercise restraint, understanding and mutual respect in national discourse, particularly on sensitive issues.
It emphasised that unity and peace must remain paramount in addressing national challenges.
The Fellowship reaffirmed its commitment to fairness, justice and mutual respect, urging that these values guide public engagement and responses to issues affecting the country.
Politics
Removal From INEC’s Portal, Abure-Led LP Faction Mulls Legal Action
In A Statement Issued On Saturday, Mr Obiorah Ifoh, The Factional Spokesperson, Described The Decision Of The Electoral Body As Strange.
Mr Ifoh Also Said The Sacked Factional Leadership Of The Party Will Protest The Action Of INEC.
Stating That Judgment Of The Court And The Decision Of INEC Will Not Stop Its Members From Putting Up A Strong Appearance In The Forthcoming 2027 General Election, Mr Ifoh Noted Legal Redress Would Be Sought By LP.
He Said, “Some Persons Who Are Applauding The Impunity By Some Politicians Should Retrace And Do Some Introspection, Because This Was How In The Past They Applauded Injustice In Our Democracy Because They Were Beneficiaries.
“At The End Of The Day, When Their Enthroned Leaders Began To Abuse Power, They Started Complaining.
“For Us In Labour Party, Our Faith Is Strong That The Appellate Court Will Do The Right Thing And Therefore We Advise Our Members To Remain Calm. We Will Continue With The Struggle To Take Our Party From The Godfather,” Mr Ifoh Said.
He Also Stated That The Labour Party Is A Party Formed On The Basis Of Social Democracy Where No One Man Is Permitted To Appoint Everybody.
According To Him, It Is Against The Party’s Principles For “One Man To Sit At A Place And Gather Everybody And Appoint Everybody From The National Working Committee To The State.
“That Is Impunity Of The Highest Order. This, I Believe, Negates The Principles Of The Party.
“If We Say There Is No Party Ideology In Nigeria, This Is How It Starts. We Are Very Sure That It Will Be Quashed On Appeal,” He Added.
Mr Ifoh Also Described The Celebration And Excitement Showcased By Senator Nenadi Usman And The Abia State Governor, Dr Alex Otti As Temporary.
He Said Dr Otti, Senator Usman And Their Cohorts’ Names Which Were Already Listed On INEC’s Portal Will Be Short-Lived.
“It Is For A Short Time. Their Victory Is Pyrrhic And There Is Nothing To Celebrate Because Doomsday Is Closer Than They Will Imagine; Which I Believe Will Be Very Catastrophic For Them.
“Moreover, It Is Very Clear That The Appointment Of The Caretaker Committee Did Not Go Through The Normal Procedure. Proper Notice Was Not Given In Line With The Party Constitution And The Electoral Act,” He Said.
-
Politics4 days agoPFN Rejects Call For INEC Chairman’s Removal Over Genocide Comments
-
Rivers4 days agoFasthire, PHCCIMA, CIPM Host CareerFest 2026 In PH
-
Sports4 days agoEnekwechi wins Orlen Cup in season opener
-
Politics4 days agoHoodlums Disrupt LP-ADC Defection Event In Lagos
-
Sports4 days agoSimba open Nwabali talks
-
Sports4 days agoFalconets, Senegalese Lionesses arrive Ibadan for qualifier
-
Politics4 days agoRemoval From INEC’s Portal, Abure-Led LP Faction Mulls Legal Action
-
Niger Delta4 days agoTinubu, Jonathan, Diri Pay Last Respect To Ewhrudjakpo
