…Bill removes President, Governors from National Police Council

…Sets conditions for Federal Intervention

…Legislation retains Federal Police until States are ready

…Preserves officers, institutions, bars automatic conversion of vigilante groups

 

The State Police Constitution Alteration Bill passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday has introduced constitutional safeguards aimed at insulating the proposed State Police Services from political interference, while establishing a framework for direct funding, independent oversight, federal intervention and community policing.

 

The bill, which seeks to alter the 1999 Constitution to establish a dual policing system comprising a Federal Police Service and State Police Services, goes beyond creating state police by setting out the institutional, financial and operational mechanisms expected to guide the new policing architecture.

 

One of the most far-reaching provisions of the bill as sighted by The Guardian is the constitutional guarantee of direct funding for State Police Services.

 

The legislation amends Section 121 of the Constitution by providing that “any amount standing to the credit of a State Police Service established for a State shall be paid directly to the Service.”

 

The provision is intended to shield State Police Services from political control through financial deprivation, a concern that featured prominently during legislative deliberations on the bill.

 

The House in its observation said Without guaranteed funding, State Police may become ineffective or subject to political manipulation

 

The legislation also seeks to strengthen the independence of police oversight institutions by removing executive control over their operations.

 

To achieve this, the bill amends Sections 158 and 202 of the Constitution to provide that the Federal Police Service Commission, the National Police Council and State Police Service Commissions “shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other authority or person including the President” at the federal level and “including the Governor” at the state level.

 

The House argued that the bill proposed earlier only grants independence to the Federal Police Service Commission but fails to extend it to the National Police Council, which oversees both federal and state police services and remains subject to executive control through the President.

 

The lawmakers observed that this would creates a significant gap in the independence framework.

 

“Without similar independence for the National Police Council, the oversight of state police services could be compromised by political interference from the executive branch”, the House said.

 

Furthermore, the bill passed empower commissions to regulate their own procedures without requiring presidential or gubernatorial approval, while State Police Service Commissions will submit annual reports to their respective State Houses of Assembly.

 

According to Clause 9 in Alteration of Section 158 of the constitution, it said

 

“In exercising its power to make appointments or to exercise disciplinary control over persons and in the conduct of their constitutional mandate, the Code of Conduct Bureau, the National

Judicial Council, the Federal Civil Service Commission, the Federal Judicial Service Commission, the Revenue Mobilization and Fiscal Commission, the Federal Character

Commission, Federal Police Service Commission and National Police Council, and the Independent National Electoral Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other authority or person including the President”.

 

The bill also draws a clear constitutional boundary between the responsibilities of the Federal Police Service and State Police Services.

 

While the Federal Police Service will continue to handle federal policing responsibilities including terrorism, organised crime, cybercrime, border security, policing of the Federal Capital Territory and offences with interstate or international dimensions, State Police Services will be responsible for enforcing state laws, maintaining public order, protecting lives and property, and carrying out other local policing functions within their respective states.

 

To prevent jurisdictional conflicts, the bill in Clause 16 provides that “A State Police Service shall not exercise police powers outside its home State,” except where authorised by an Act of the National Assembly or under fresh pursuit and reciprocal policing arrangements.

 

The legislation also establishes strict constitutional safeguards governing federal intervention in the affairs of State Police Services.

 

It provides that the Federal Police “shall not deploy or initiate any intervention within a State unless it has first exhausted all necessary operational and technical support to the State Police Service” and established that such intervention constitutes “an absolute measure of last resort.”

 

Under the bill, federal intervention may only occur where there is an actual or imminent breakdown of public order beyond the capacity of the State Police Service, where the Governor requests assistance, where the State Police Service is unable to function due to serious administrative or operational incapacity, where there is substantial evidence of egregious human rights violations or partisan intimidation, or where the situation poses a serious threat to national security or the integrity of the federation.

 

Even in such circumstances, any intervention must be “strictly temporary, necessary, proportionate, and limited to the specific territory, functions, and timeframe required” to address the situation.

 

The President is required to authorise any intervention in writing, stating its grounds, duration and territorial scope, while notifying the Governor, Speaker of the State House of Assembly, National Police Council and National Assembly within 48 hours.

 

The bill further provides that no intervention shall continue beyond the period prescribed by law unless approved by resolutions of both chambers of the National Assembly.

 

It equally subjects federal intervention to judicial scrutiny, providing that “the legality, scope, duration, and conduct of an intervention… shall be subject to judicial review,” with courts required to give such matters accelerated hearing.

 

The legislation also prohibits the use of federal intervention to undermine democratic governance, stating that “no intervention shall dissolve a State Police Service or suspend the elected institutions of a State except in accordance with this Constitution.”

 

The bill also removed the President and state governors as members of the National Police Council, while expanding its oversight responsibilities under Nigeria’s new policing framework.

 

Under the current constitutional arrangement, the President chairs the Nigeria Police Council. However, the bill provides that the reconstituted National Police Council shall be headed by “a Chairman to be appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the National Assembly.”

 

The proposal in Clause 20 also removes the 36 state governors from the Council, replacing them with the Attorneys-General of the states as representatives of state governments.

 

Beyond the changes in membership, the bill broadens the Council’s composition by bringing in representatives of professional and civil society organisations.

 

Under the proposed structure, the Council will comprise a Chairman appointed by the President and confirmed by the National Assembly, the Attorney-General of the Federation, a serving police officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector-General representing the Federal Police Service, Attorneys-General of the 36 states, six retired police officers representing the six geopolitical zones, one representative each of the National Human Rights Commission and the Public Complaints Commission, representatives of the Nigeria Labour Congress and the Nigerian Bar Association, as well as the Secretary to the Council.

 

The legislation equally expands the Council’s responsibilities beyond its existing advisory role.

 

Among its new functions are coordinating national policing policy between the Federal Police Service and State Police Services, supervising both police institutions, recommending appointments and removals of the Inspector-General of Police and State Chiefs of Police, and performing other responsibilities assigned by the Constitution or an Act of the National Assembly.

 

To enhance accountability at the state level, the bill provides that each State Police Service shall be headed by a Chief of Police appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of the National Police Council and subject to confirmation by the State House of Assembly.

 

The Chief of Police may only be removed after a fair hearing, on the recommendation of the National Police Council and with the approval of not less than two-thirds of members of the State House of Assembly.

 

The bill also empowers police officers to challenge unlawful directives by requesting the appropriate Police Service Commission to review any order considered inconsistent with the Constitution or national minimum standards.

 

In addition, the legislation mandates every State Police Service to establish Community Policing Committees in each of the 774 local government areas.

According to the bill, the committees shall comprise representatives of traditional institutions, local governments, women, youth organisations, persons with disabilities, civil society organisations and recognised professional bodies.

 

However, the legislation makes clear that the committees “shall serve purely advisory functions and shall not exercise police powers.”

 

The bill further empowers the National Assembly to prescribe national minimum standards applicable to both Federal and State Police Services, covering recruitment, training, certification, promotion, discipline, use of force, firearms, public reporting, accountability and intergovernmental cooperation.

 

While states may adopt standards that are higher than the national minimum, the legislation provides that such standards “shall not derogate from or fall below those standards.”

 

Further check revealed that the State Police Constitution Alteration Bill retained the Nigeria Police Force throughout the transition to a dual policing system, while prohibiting existing vigilante and other local security outfits from automatically becoming State Police Services.

 

The transitional and savings provisions contained in Clause 25 of the bill establish the legal framework for implementing state policing without disrupting existing security operations or creating a policing vacuum across the country.

 

Under the proposal, the Nigeria Police Force will not cease to exist immediately after the constitutional amendment takes effect. Instead, it will continue as the Federal Police Service pending its restructuring in accordance with the Constitution and an Act of the National Assembly.

 

The bill provides that “the Nigeria Police Force established under section 214 of the Constitution… shall continue as the Federal Police Service until restructured in accordance with this Constitution and an Act of the National Assembly.”

 

It also guarantees continuity in personnel by allowing the Inspector-General of Police and all serving officers of the Nigeria Police Force to retain their positions under the new Federal Police Service.

 

Also, existing policing institutions will remain in place under new identities. The Police Service Commission will become the Federal Police Service Commission, while the Nigeria Police Council will be redesignated as the National Police Council.

 

To ensure there is no security vacuum during implementation, the bill provides that the Federal Police Service will continue policing every state until the respective State Police Service is established by a law of the State House of Assembly, certified as meeting national minimum standards and commences operations.

 

Even after State Police Services become operational, the Federal Police Service will remain responsible for federal policing functions, including terrorism, organised crime, border security, cybercrime and other matters falling within federal jurisdiction.

 

The legislation also bars the automatic conversion of existing state and community security outfits into police organisations.

 

It states that “No existing State, local, community, vigilante, neighbourhood, traffic or other security outfit shall, by reason only of this Act, become a State Police Service or exercise police powers or bear firearms unless authorised in accordance with this Constitution and an Act of the National Assembly.”

 

To avoid widespread legal uncertainty, the bill further provides that all existing laws referring to the Nigeria Police Force, the Nigeria Police Council or the Police Service Commission shall automatically be construed as referring to the Federal Police Service, the National Police Council and the Federal Police Service Commission respectively until such laws are amended.

 

While the transitional framework seeks to ensure continuity and stability, an analysis of the bill identified several implementation gaps that may require further legislative action.