Multi-layer policing:How to minimise conflict of interests among agencies

Efforts to establish a multi-layer police system in the country represent a significant shift in its security strategy. Proponents of this system, which is aimed at decentralising the country’s policing through legislative changes, insist that it must focus on accountability and clear jurisdictional demarcations to mitigate conflicts, AMEH OCHOJILA reports.

Section 214 of the Nigerian Constitution establishes the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) as the sole police force for the Federation. However, the law also allows the National Assembly to make laws regarding the organisation and administration of the force. This means that any discussion on the creation of state police as being proposed must consider constitutional provisions and potential amendments to ancillary Acts like the Police Act.

The agitation for state police as a solution to worsening insecurity across the country has lingered for some time now and even featured prominently in the 2014 National Conference Report.

Supporters of the idea equally visualise it as a crucial aspect of federalism, which would allow the federating entities to manage law enforcement within their jurisdictions, while the Federal Government maintains centralised control over certain security functions like immigration and the military.

Therefore, the ongoing legislative efforts surrounding the establishment of state police underscore a pivotal moment in the nation’s security landscape. The bill, sponsored by the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Benjamin Kalu and 14 others, aims to amend the 1999 Constitution, by removing the police from the Exclusive Legislative List, and adding it to the Concurrent List, effectively empowering states to have state-controlled policing.

Leading the debate on the bill on behalf of the co-sponsors, Muktar Shagaya (APC, Kwara), said that the State Police Bill is not only an issue that was aimed at strengthening federalism, but that the exigency of time calls for its creation.

“This bill emerges as a necessary response to several calls for a decentralised and community-oriented approach to law enforcement. It seeks to navigate the complex landscape of security challenges by empowering our states with the means to address issues unique to their localities.

“This proposed alteration represents not just a legal adjustment to our grundnorm, but a visionary leap towards a safer, more secure and harmonious country,” he said.

In essence, the bill proposes 16 alterations to the constitution and introduces a comprehensive framework to ensure cohesion, accountability and uniform standards between the federal police and state police.

The bill also seeks to establish state police service commissions as distinct from the federal Police Service Commission (PSC) with clearly defined roles and jurisdictions, as well as, to oversee recruitment, training, and discipline, thereby ensuring professionalism and adherence to ethical standards.

Shagaya proposed a paradigm shift towards community-oriented law enforcement, recognising the diverse security needs across different regions. By empowering states with the authority to establish and oversee their police forces, the bill, he said, aims to foster a safer, more secure environment tailored to local realities.

Furthermore, the bill, when passed, is expected to provide a comprehensive framework aimed at ensuring accountability, cohesion, and uniform standards within the multilayer policing system.

Additionally, the legislation incorporates measures to address conflict of interest, and challenges inherent in multilayer policing structures. Inherent provisions such as stringent regulations against dual employment and whistleblower protection would serve to safeguard against potential abuses and promote transparency.

Furthermore, the bill is also expected to emphasize the importance of community engagement initiatives, recognising the invaluable role of citizens in maintaining security and fostering trust between law enforcement agencies and the public, which is currently lacking.

Also speaking, the Chairman of the House Committee on Defence, Babajimi Benson (APC, Lagos), echoed some of Shagaya’s arguments on the proposed legislation According to him, the bill must set conditions for states willing to set up police.

He is, however, also of the view that the Federal Government should have the power to approve the setting up of police for interested states, adding that the government must retain the power to withdraw such a licence if a state fails to meet the required conditions.

In his contribution, Awaji Abiante (PDP, Rivers) said that the bill would cure the tragedy of the unitary degree of 1966, warning that efforts must be made to prevent the defeat of the bill.

Aliyu Madaki (NNPP, Kano) boasted that he was part of the group that championed the “killing of the bill” in the 8th and 9th Assemblies because of the fear of governors abusing state police.

Overall, the legislative approaches outlined in the bill represent a significant step towards enhancing transparency, integrity, and effectiveness within the country’s policing framework.

However, there are growing concerns over possible conflicts of interest in multilayer policing. Pundits maintain that the ongoing legislation is expected to mitigate such conflicts among law enforcement agencies.

Legal practitioners on their part believe that it is imperative to highlight the legal intricacies of multilayer policing in a country such as Nigeria, to create better synergy among the different layers that would emanate.

This is because by prioritising merit-based recruitment, regular review processes, and stringent ethical standards, the law would minimise conflicts of interest and promote a more accountable and professional police force nationwide.

The executive director at Sterling Law Centre, Deji Ajare, is of the view that a comprehensive legal framework aimed at revolutionising policing system is critical for a multi-layered approach to policing in a country marked by ethnic diversity and historical tensions.

“Key provisions essential for effective implementation of such a system will include the establishment of clear jurisdictional guidelines to prevent conflicts, the formation of joint task forces for handling cross-jurisdictional crimes, and the creation of a National Policing Council to oversee coordination and dispute resolution.

“Besides, the framework must include robust community policing programmes; transparent command structures, and sensitivity training on ethnic and religious issues. It must also emphasise mechanisms for dispute resolution, accountability, and legislative oversight to ensure fairness and effectiveness,” he explained.

Ajare’s proposal underscores the importance of equitable funding and resource allocation, along with clear guidelines to curb political interference in police operations.

Additionally, it calls for enhanced judicial oversight to uphold the rule of law and ensure accountability at all levels of policing. This comprehensive framework, if adopted and implemented effectively, he said, has the potential to transform Nigeria’s policing landscape, fostering trust, unity, and security across diverse communities.

His words: “It must provide for a periodic legislative review of multi-layer policing practices to ensure that they adapt over time to changes in the social and political landscape; encourage public participation and feedback during these reviews to enhance democratic engagement and transparency.

“The enacted laws must explicitly prohibit political interference in operational police matters, including deployment, investigations and personnel decisions, as well as, establish severe penalties for violations to deter political overreach into police operations.”

A legal practitioner, Terkura Douglas Pepe, emphasised the importance of clearly defining the investigative and prosecutorial jurisdictions of both federal and state police forces to mitigate conflicts.

Drawing on the American model, he suggested that such delineations could be incorporated into the Constitution to provide a solid legal framework. He explained that the investigative and prosecutorial jurisdictions of both the federal and state police must be clearly stated.

The lawyer said once this is done, conflicts would be avoided among the different police levels and suggested that such role definition must be included in the constitution to make power delineation more potent.

Another lawyer, Paul Mgbeoma proposed a hybrid approach, also inspired by the American system, where states maintain their respective police departments alongside federal police like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) overseeing the activities of the others.

His words: “I think we can fashion our policing after the American model where different states have their police departments and then there’s the federal police anchored by the FBI. That way, there’ll be checks and balances and each police institution is given specific powers and areas of responsibility. We should not completely change from a unitary police to state-based policing. This is to avoid abuse of power by the various state governors.”

Abuja-based lawyer, Monday Ikpe, similarly wants a clear separation of functions within the multilayer policing structure. He also highlighted the necessity of amending the constitution to achieve this goal as, according to him, there is a need to specify functions.

Omale Ajonye, a lawyer, also agreed that jurisdictional demarcation is imperative. While underscoring the legal complexities surrounding multilayer policing, he stressed the need for clear constitutional provisions on the legality and functionality of multilayer police institutions.

Ajonye pointed out that mere legislative action that does not alter the constitution to accommodate the changes would not be enough to address the issue. The Executive Director of People’s Orientation Initiative for Community Engagement (POICE), Elaija Fanen, believes that to have effective functioning and less crisis multilayer policing, there should be proper operational guidelines that spell out rules for each layer of police.

Fanen insisted that the enabling laws must clearly define areas that federal, state, or local council police operatives should cover to avoid overlapping and conflicts. The executive director said that it would be counterproductive if these laws were not spelt out in the law books.