A PAPER PRESENTED BY SABASTINE ANYIA, THE 1ST VICE PRESIDENT OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION & CHAIRMAN NBA HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTE AT INSTITUTE FOR PEACE, SECURITY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES (IPSDS) NNAMDI AZIKIWE UNIVERSITY, AWKA.
20th NOVEMBER 2025
Who is the Police?
The police is an authorized public officer who is responsible for maintaining law and order, preventing crimes, investigating crimes, protecting life and property, and enforcing the laws of a community or nation.
What is Policing?
Policing is the system of activities undertaken to uphold public safety and security, enforce laws, prevent crimes, investigate crime, and support the orderly functioning of society.
What is the difference between State and National Policing?
State Policing refers to law enforcement agencies that operate within and are governed by an individual state or regional jurisdiction. They enforce state laws and handle crimes occurring within that specific area.
National policing refers to a centralized law enforcement structure whose authority extends across the entire nation. National police agencies enforce federal or national laws, address crimes that transcend state boundaries or implicate national security, and provide coordination, support, or oversight to sub-national policing bodies.
The question of policing in Nigeria bothers on the soul of governance at the subnational level. The Nigeria Police Force operates as a single, central body that stretches its authority across thirty six states and the Federal Capital Territory. Yet, the realities of those states are vastly different. We can tell that the security needs of the different stares vary sharply. A central command in Abuja, no matter how well intentioned, often finds itself disconnected from these local realities.
One of the most enduring challenges lies in scale. Nigeria’s population is now beyond 200 million, but the ratio of police to citizens remains alarmingly low. This imbalance leaves whole communities under-protected and drives them toward informal security networks like the hunters’ groups, vigilante bodies, and community watch units which often replace the state’s presence in the rural towns. Their existence signals both necessity and failure, necessity because people must survive and failure because the formal system has retreated from the outer edges of the country where it is needed most
At its heart, the problem is more of governance than numbers. The Nigeria Police Force struggles with poor funding, limited training, and a culture that too often prioritizes power over service. Corruption, extortion, and human rights abuses have weakened public trust. When the police enter certain communities, they are not greeted as protectors but as outsiders, villains even. This alienation fuels the argument that states should control their own police services, since local officers would better understand the language, customs, and underlying tensions within their communities. This can be best understood when the case of Plateau and Benue massacre is taken into consideration.
But the call for state police raises its own set of fears. Many state governments already struggle to meet basic obligations like paying teachers and health workers. Funding and sustaining a competent police structure requires far more resources than most states currently can afford. Without a clear and sustainable funding mechanism, a state police system might exist only in name, unable to provide the professionalism nor stability that true reform demands.
Even more troubling is the political dimension. In a political culture where governors wield significant influence, control over a state police could easily turn into a tool for intimidation. The temptation to deploy police officers against political rivals or to suppress dissent would be undoubtedly high. Unless strong checks and balances are built into the system, decentralization could simply replace federal abuse with local tyranny. In that case, the cure would be worse than the disease.
The most overlooked element in this debate is coordination. Nigeria’s security threats often cross state borders, Look at kidnapping, armed robbery, banditry and cybercrime. If each state builds its own autonomous force without a shared framework, the nation risks creating fragmented enclaves of authority, legal cult groups. A hybrid model could offer a more balanced path forward. States might handle community based policing, neighborhood security, and preventive engagement, while the federal structure could focus on crimes that transcend boundaries, such as terrorism, trafficking, and financial crimes. This approach would require clear constitutional reform, transparent funding, and an independent oversight body to ensure cooperation rather than competition.
In the end, the viability of state police depends on the system. A local police force cannot thrive in a weak governance environment. Without transparency, accountability, and a genuine commitment to justice, the structure will only reproduce the flaws of the federal model. State police can work only when built on strong institutions not political convenience. Until then, Nigeria’s challenge remains to rebuild the very trust that makes policing possible, to bring to life the slogan “police is your friend”
I am not ignorant of the fact that this topic has divergent views and each side is well loaded with convincing points but as a person, I am not infallible -infallibility lies only with the almighty. Sequel to the above, I opine that State Police will enhance responsiveness to local needs, improve community relations and intelligent gatherings and a more efficient allocation of resources. My reasons for taking this position are as follows:
1) Local context and understanding: Officers recruited and trained locally have a deeper understanding of communities’ specific cultural nuances, language, custom and unique security challenges. This familiarity allows them address State specific needs and priorities more effectively.
2) Improve responsiveness and efficiency: A decentralised police force is often more agile and responds more quickly to local incidents, emergencies and specific crime patterns such as inter community riots or abduction. This avoids the potential delays in obtaining approval from the distant central command.
3) Enhance community policing and trust: Closer ties between police and the communities they serve foster greater trust and cooperation. Residents are more likely to share vital intelligent information with officers they know and trust which is critical for effective crime prevention.
4) Increase accountability and oversight: The State government is directly responsible for the performance and conduct of their police forces, which can lead to greater accountability and oversight. Mechanisms like Independent Civilian Oversight Board can monitor Police conduct and investigate complaints of abuse ensuring that the force serves the Public interest.
5) Resource allocation and burden reduction: State Police allows for the allocation of resources according to a State’s unique security needs, whether that means investing more in rural patrols or urban surveillance. This also reduces the burden on federal law enforcement agencies, freeing them to focus on national and other crimes like terrorism, organized crime and interstate offences.
6) Support for federalism: The existence of the State Police forces aligns with the principle of true federalism, allows State greater autonomy in governing their internal security matters much as they do with education and health.
Finally, state Police is a viable option as it offers opportunity to bring law enforcement closer to the people in proving trust and enhancing the ability to tackle diverse security challenges with targeted solutions.
Thanks for listening.
