Every generation of leaders is confronted with defining decisions that shape the future of its nation. Such decisions often require the courage to examine existing institutions honestly, preserve what has served the country well, and reform what no longer responds adequately to contemporary realities.
Nigeria’s ongoing debate on the establishment of State Police is one of those defining moments.
The conversation is not simply about creating another police organisation. It is about determining whether our policing architecture is sufficiently equipped to confront the increasingly complex security realities of a twenty-first-century federal democracy while remaining firmly anchored in constitutional governance, national unity, professionalism and respect for human rights.
As expected, the debate has generated passionate opinions.
Some believe that decentralising policing will strengthen community security, improve intelligence gathering and bring law enforcement closer to the people. Others worry that devolving policing powers could expose the system to political interference, weaken national cohesion or recreate challenges associated with Nigeria’s earlier experience with regional policing.
ALSO READ State police: Ex-DIG Gumel urges Nigeria to embrace reform with strong safeguards
These concerns deserve thoughtful reflection rather than emotional reactions.
Constitutional reform should never be driven by political expediency. Equally, it should never be resisted simply because history records that previous arrangements encountered difficulties. Mature democracies constantly review their institutions, not because those institutions have completely failed, but because societies evolve, security threats change, and governance must adapt accordingly.
History is one of democracy’s greatest teachers. Yet history performs its highest service when it informs the future rather than confines it.
Nigeria today is not the Nigeria of five or six decades ago. Democratic governance has become more deeply rooted. Constitutional awareness has expanded considerably. Judicial independence has grown stronger. Legislative oversight has improved. The media has become more vibrant, civil society more active, and citizens more informed and engaged in public affairs than ever before.
These institutional developments provide a significantly stronger democratic environment within which constitutional reforms can be designed, implemented and continually improved.
The question before Nigeria is therefore not whether mistakes occurred in the past. The more important question is whether we have learned enough from those mistakes to design better institutions for the future.
Fortunately, we are not embarking upon this conversation without reference points.
Many federal democracies across the world successfully operate policing systems in which national and subnational police organisations coexist within carefully designed constitutional frameworks. Although no model can be transplanted wholesale into another country, comparative experience demonstrates that decentralised policing can function effectively where responsibilities are clearly defined, operational standards are professional, oversight institutions are independent, and accountability mechanisms remain strong.
Nigeria possesses the advantage of learning simultaneously from its own history and from international best practices.
The objective should therefore not be to replicate another country’s model or revive an earlier Nigerian arrangement. Rather, it should be to develop a uniquely Nigerian policing framework that reflects our constitutional structure, accommodates our diversity and responds effectively to our security realities.
It is equally important to appreciate the changing nature of insecurity itself.
Today’s security threats are increasingly local in their manifestation but national in their consequences. Terrorism, kidnapping, banditry, violent extremism, cybercrime, organised criminal networks, communal conflicts and other emerging threats require timely intelligence, strong community relationships, rapid operational response and seamless coordination across all levels of government.
An effective policing architecture must therefore combine strategic national coordination with efficient local responsiveness.
This is precisely why the current constitutional conversation should be viewed as one of complementarity rather than replacement.
The proposal under consideration envisions a policing system in which Federal and State Police institutions operate within clearly defined constitutional mandates while complementing one another in the collective pursuit of public safety. Such an arrangement has the potential to strengthen national security by allowing each institution to focus on responsibilities best suited to its constitutional competence.
Understandably, concerns have been expressed regarding possible abuse of policing powers.
Such concerns should never be ignored. Every constitutional institution carries the possibility of misuse. Executive authority can be abused. Legislative powers can be exercised improperly. Electoral processes can be manipulated. Yet constitutional democracies do not abandon institutions because abuse is possible. Instead, they establish stronger safeguards capable of preventing abuse while preserving the institution’s essential purpose.
The same constitutional philosophy should guide policing reform.
Strong legal safeguards, independent oversight, judicial review, professional standards, transparent recruitment, operational accountability and effective legislative supervision should remain indispensable components of any future policing framework. These are not optional additions; they are the very foundations upon which public confidence depends.
It is equally important to recognise that policing reform alone cannot resolve Nigeria’s security challenges. Sustainable security also depends upon effective governance, social justice, economic opportunity, quality education, technological innovation, intelligence coordination, judicial efficiency and active community participation.
Reforming policing is therefore one important part of a broader national security strategy.
Perhaps the most enduring responsibility of policymakers is not merely to respond to present concerns but to anticipate future realities. Constitutions are intended to outlive governments. Institutions established today will serve generations yet unborn. Their design should therefore reflect both present necessities and future possibilities.
Finally, constitutional reform is an ongoing democratic process rather than a single legislative event. If practical experience reveals operational shortcomings after implementation, democratic institutions possess both the authority and the responsibility to strengthen safeguards, refine operational arrangements and improve institutional performance. That continuous capacity for self-correction is one of the defining characteristics of every mature constitutional democracy. Nigeria should therefore approach this historic conversation neither with fear nor with haste, but with wisdom, confidence and constitutional discipline.
The future cannot be secured by institutions designed solely for the past. Our responsibility is to build policing institutions capable of confronting tomorrow’s security challenges while remaining faithful to the enduring principles of constitutionalism, federalism, democratic governance, professionalism, accountability, the rule of law and unwavering respect for human dignity.
History should remain our teacher. The Constitution should remain our compass. The security, liberty and welfare of the Nigerian people should remain our highest purpose.
DIG Mohammed Usaini Gumel (Rtd), FSPSP, FIPMA psc, is a retired Deputy Inspector-General of Police and a public policy contributor on policing, democratic governance and security sector reform in Nigeria. He’s the current National Secretary of Project 774 Network for Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.
