Stakeholders in South-South region have advocated constitutional amendment for the establishment of state police, aiming to resolve legality issues and jurisdictional conflicts between the state and federal forces.

In a survey conducted by the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Akwa Ibom, Rivers and Cross River, the stakeholders expressed divergent views on state police establishment.

Some respondents opposed it citing political abuse while others said it was necessary due to insecurity.

They, however, affirmed that if there should be state police, the 1999 Constitution should be amended while legal framework should be clearly stipulated.

Speaking in Akwa Ibom, Prof. Aniekam Brown said that without constitutional amendment, the present federal structure would not allow for the establishment of state police.

Brown, a professor of Criminology, University of Uyo, added that the federal police should be equipped structurally to be stronger than the state police.

He said that the state police was a welcome development, but added that there might be some teething problems.

“It calls for a legislation to make provisions for seamless state police; while I say that, Nigerians should get ready for hiccups.

Brown said that the legislations should be detailed to avoid conflict between the state and the federal police, while including limitations on where power ends and begins.

“If the leadership of the state goes against the federal government, the arrival of the federal police should be able to make a statement,” he said.

On his part, Mr Ansalem Eyo, supported the state police strong legislation saying it would not function without constitutional amendment.

Eyo, a legal practitioner and Chairman, Association of Retired Police Officers in Akwa Ibom, said that “the Police is established as a federal institution in section 214 to 216 of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

“So, if we have got to do anything about the setting of the state police, we have to amend the constitution,” Eyo said.

He added that the establishment of the state police would improve response time and enhance community relations.

Eyo explained that the state police had an advantage as its personnel would be familiar to the terrain of operations, culture and needs of the people, thereby ensuring effective policing.

However, he expressed fear on sustainability of state police operations, citing states’ resources constraint and capacities to execute their duties, while standard procedures of law enforcement would be lacking.

“There are so many issues, but it boils down to the constitution; the constitution has to be amended, otherwise we will not be able to establish state police in the kind of set up we have here,” he said.

He said that the state police could function effectively with the federal police by ensuring that the former handles issues pertaining to the state laws while the latter takes care of the federal laws.

Another legal practitioner, Mr Oyibio Okon also supported the call for the amendment of the constitution, saying that the National Assembly (NASS) should enact a law to institute the state police.

He added that the NASS should also stipulate the legal framework of the state police to avoid conflicts with the federal police.

“The work they should be doing should be taken from the federal police; if state police is better funded, you may not need to go to federal police.’’

Okon also said that a well-designed state police framework could strengthen internal security without undermining national cohesion.

He said that state police would be funded by the state which would recruit indigenes of the state to the task.

Okon added that the establishment of state police should not be mandatory, because some states would not have money to pay salaries.

The legal practitioner said that state police was good for community policing and internal security but when it has to do with national relations, federal police would be used especially in elections.

However, he expressed fears that politicians might likely use them against their opponents.

Also speaking, Mr Assam Abia, said the NASS should enact a national state policing framework while each state would pass its own state police law, defining structure, recruitment, funding, oversight and discipline in line with national standards.

He explained that states should establish a state police service commission to be responsible for recruitment, promotion, discipline and insulation from partisan control.

He said that state police should focus on community policing, enforcement of state laws, local crime prevention, and intelligence gathering to be effective, adding that ‘’clear jurisdiction boundaries are essential.”

Abia also said the federal police should retain responsibility for terrorism, arms, trafficking, cybercrime, interstate and international crimes.

He suggested that the states should establish Security Trust Funds, supported by transparent budgeting, legislative oversight, and independent audits.

“Federal incentives or conditional grants may be introduced to encourage compliance with best practices.

“Accountability mechanisms must be strong; independent complaint and oversight bodies should be created at state level, while regular reports on security performance should be submitted to State Houses of Assembly,” Abia said.

He said that governors should not exercise unchecked powers over deployment of state police, especially in politically sensitive situations.

He added that state police would complement the federal police, enhance community security, improve intelligence gathering, and deepen Nigeria’s federal practice.

In Rivers, Mrs Nsima Ebiti, a public affairs analyst, supported the call for state police and recommended phased implementation, pilot programmes, and constitutional amendments to address concerns and build public confidence.

She stressed that insecurity required decentralised solutions.

Ebiti added that many federal systems worldwide were operating multi-level policing without undermining national unity, saying that state police would work provided ‘’the laws are clear and institutions strong.”

On his part, Mr Istifanus Amana, a legal practitioner, said state police were vital to tackling Nigeria’s growing security challenges, particularly at the grassroots where federal presence remained limited.

He argued that clear constitutional safeguards, independent oversight and transparent funding would prevent abuse and ensure professionalism in state-controlled police structures.

“State police can work effectively through joint operations, shared databases and clearly defined jurisdictions aligned with the federal police command,” Amana said.

He noted that state police would help curb kidnapping, cultism and armed robbery which, he said, had overstretched federal security agencies.

Amana said that governors, as chief security officers of their states, required direct policing tools to respond swiftly to security threats and protect lives and property.

Also speaking, Dr Isa Ado, a private security contractor, expressed strong support for the initiative and said that the conflict between state and federal police would be unfounded if roles and responsibilities were clearly defined by law.

Ado said that state police could focus on community policing and internal security, while the federal police handles inter-state crimes, terrorism and national security issues.

“What is needed is structured coordination, unified training standards and federal supervision on critical operations to ensure harmony,” he said.

However, Chief Chibundu Uhegbu, an African Democratic Congress (ADC) chieftain in Woji Community, Obio/Akpor Local Government Area, opposed the proposal.

He described Nigeria as unprepared for state police, warning that it could be abused by governors to harass opponents, suppress dissent and manipulate elections.

“Weak institutions, ethnic politics and limited judicial independence could worsen human rights violations under state-controlled police forces,” Uhegbu argued.

In Cross River, Mr Fidelis Onybueke, a Senior Legal Practitioner, stated that Nigeria was not mature enough for state police, citing risks of political abuse.

The lawyer alleged that politicians already deployed security agencies to harass opponents, stressing that governors could replicate the pattern with state-controlled police.

He argued that rising insecurity did not justify decentralisation, insisting that local forces could be easily captured by the elites and weaponised against dissent.

“I think our police should still be centralised, but to enhance security, police officers who are indigenes of different states should be recruited and sent to their locality to work,” he said.

On his part, Country Director, Citizens Solution Network, Richard Inoyo, opposed the call for state police, citing governors’ poor leadership, indiscipline and likelihood of abuse.

However, he noted that if state police should be created, it should pass through constitutional steps of the national and state assemblies’ approvals by two-thirds, and presidential assent before it could exist.

He said that the state police should be underscored in the state government payroll but added that lack of utilisation of security votes and accountability by governors could deepen corruption and repression.

Inoyo dismissed fears of federal-state clashes, saying, ‘’interstate crimes will remain federal, while local offences stays under state jurisdiction.’’

He underscored the deep mistrust of political actors by citizens and added that the nation should first ensure accountability and reform before considering state police. (NAN)

Update news