State Police Could Change Power Dynamics Between Federal and State Governments

When President Bola Tinubu sent the state police constitutional amendment bill to the Senate, the talk centered on insecurity, banditry, and the Nigeria Police Force's failure to effectively manage a country with over 200 million people.

The Senate passed the bill after more than two-thirds of senators voted in favor using a manual voting process where they raised their hands. The House of Representatives had earlier approved the bill on June 11 before going on a two-week break.

The Senate will send its version of the bill to the House for agreement if there are differences before sending it to the state houses of assembly for approval. The bill needs support from at least two-thirds (24) of the 36 state houses of assembly before it goes to the president for assent.

Supporters say that having state police will bring security closer to the people, improve intelligence gathering, and boost local responses to crime.

But beyond security issues, it could change Nigeria’s political tradition, especially the power balance between the federal government and state governors during elections. If state governments have their own police, it could lessen the federal government's influence during elections.

Federal Police and Political Power

Right now, the president appoints the Inspector-General of Police, and federal authorities have operational control. Police commissioners in the states ultimately report to Abuja, not to the governors.

Although governors are supposed to be the “chief security officers” of their states, they actually have little direct power over the police and federal security agencies. Governors often complain they cannot give orders to police commissioners, even though citizens hold them accountable when security issues happen.

This situation also gives federal governments significant power over political events in the country.

During elections, police deployment, security operations, and movement restrictions on election day are mostly managed from Abuja, where the president runs the country.

Opposition politicians often accuse federal governments of using security agencies to intimidate rivals and influence election outcomes. Whether these claims are true or not, the belief that control of the police gives a political advantage is a common theme in Nigerian politics.

What the Bill Changes

The proposed constitutional amendment will change the current setup significantly.

The bill creates state police services and state police service commissions.

Section 17 of the bill outlines the appointment, command, direction, and tenure. It states that while the Federal Police Service will be led by the Inspector-General, the State Police Service will be led by a Commissioner of Police appointed by the governor, pending confirmation by the state’s House of Assembly.

Section 17(6) allows a state governor to give lawful written directives to the commissioner of police on public safety and order issues.

These provisions give governors more power over state policing bodies, while state houses of assembly will provide legislative oversight.

Governors will also rely on Section 22, which sets up a State Police Service Commission to hire personnel, manage promotions, and discipline officers in the state police system.

The state government will take on significant responsibilities for funding and running the state police. Although the bill does not clearly say how governors will fund the police, it suggests that states will cover much of the financial burden.

This means governors will have more power over the appointment and management of police commissioners in their states.

Under this plan, power currently held in Abuja will be shared with state governments. This shift in security powers could have major effects on elections.

The Decline of Federal Dominance

Since 1999, federal incumbency has provided huge advantages. Control of security institutions has been one of those advantages.

A ruling party in power can send federal agencies to any state, even those run by opposition parties.

But state police could lessen that control.

If governors manage policing in their states, they may not need federal security structures as much.

A governor whose interests clash with the ruling party may use their police to push back against perceived federal interference, especially during elections.

In practical terms, a governor could challenge the federal security agencies during elections if state police mainly report to the state government.

This could create a more competitive political scene in states led by opposition parties.

Opposition States May Become Harder to Penetrate

Currently, opposition parties run five of Nigeria’s 36 states: Anambra, which is under APGA; Osun, governed by the Accord Party; Abia, led by the Labour Party; and Oyo and Bauchi, managed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).

The ruling APC controls 31 states and Abuja.

Under the current setup, the federal government has a strong security presence in every state via the Nigeria Police Force. But with state police, opposition governors would be better positioned to safeguard their political interests before, during, and after elections.

State police would limit the federal government’s ability to control election security. For the APC and President Tinubu, ahead of the 2027 elections, flipping opposition states may become harder.

The federal advantage from incumbency could weaken significantly.

Governors Become Stronger Political Actors

The main winners of state police may not be ordinary citizens or political parties, but the governors themselves.

They already have a lot of influence over local government funds, state assemblies, and political structures.

Control of police institutions would further solidify their positions.

A governor running for re-election or trying to install a successor may have significant sway over the state’s security system.

This power could shield them from outside political pressures and strengthen their negotiating power with national parties.

Rather than relying heavily on the federal government for security, governors would gain more independence.

A New Era of Federalism?

Supporters of state police argue that this is the goal. Nigeria’s federal structure has been too centralized for many years.

Concentrating security powers in Abuja goes against the principles of federalism. Letting states control their own police could deepen federalism and boost state autonomy.

The political results could just be part of that change. If governors gain more power over security, the federal government will lose some of its influence.

This change might create a more balanced federation where states have greater negotiating power.

Concern Not New

Critics of state police warn that shifting power away from the federal government could lead to abuse by governors. They might use state police against political opponents, suppress dissent, or intimidate rival parties.

This worry is not new.

Many governors already face accusations of controlling local institutions, including state assemblies and local governments. Giving them policing power may increase authority at the state level. So, state police might not stop political interference; it could just move that power from Abuja to state capitals.

The question may no longer be whether politicians control the police, but which politicians control them.

The 2027 Implication

If the constitutional amendment gets approval from at least 24 state assemblies and the institutions start operating before the next elections, Nigeria’s electoral scene could change a lot.

Federal incumbency might lose its power, governors could become stronger, and opposition states may resist federal influence more.

Political parties may lean more on governors for electoral advantages instead of the federal government.

For President Tinubu and the APC, state police might bring unexpected political consequences from a reform aimed mainly at security.

The proposal meant to fight insecurity could reshape the political power balance in the country.

In the end, the discussion about state police may not just be about tackling crime. It could also decide who holds political power in Nigeria’s next election cycle.

Constitutional Lawyer Speaks

A constitutional lawyer, Soliu Bakare, told PREMIUM TIMES that state policing is a good development, though he recognized the risks of political abuse.

When asked about worries that governors might misuse state police, Mr Bakare said it is better to let the system work before adding more constitutional protections against potential issues.

"We have to look at the purpose of the state police.

"There is no system that cannot be abused; even all the systems we have now are being misused in some way, and state policing will not be an exception, but constitutional safeguards will minimize it," he said.