Nigeria needs state police but with brains, not brute politics

BY OLU ALLEN

One uncomfortable truth has emerged under this current national assembly: President Tinubu enjoys an unusual level of legislative compliance. What he wants, he gets. If there is any sector where that influence should be put to use immediately, it is security reform. Nigeria can no longer pretend that a single, overburdened police command in Abuja can secure 220 million people across 923,000 square kilometres. The argument against state policing has always rested on fear, not logic. Critics insist governors will hijack the system, but this fear—while not entirely baseless—is far too shallow to guide a nation in crisis.

Nigeria already operates a pseudo-decentralised system. The Nigerian Police Force, the Civil Defence Corps, and fast-growing vigilante formations exist side by side, often overlapping and sometimes working at cross purposes. Instead of dismissing this reality, we should harness it, reorganise it, and convert it into a structured national advantage. What we need is not endless debate, but a clear, disciplined framework that delivers security without enabling tyranny.

It is time to adopt a policing model that reflects the size, diversity, and insecurity landscape of present-day Nigeria. The most viable and pragmatic solution is a three-tier policing structure with embedded checks and balances—an approach drawn from global best practices but adapted intelligently to our peculiar context.

A Three-Tier Nigerian Model with Built-In Oversight

If Nigeria is to achieve genuine security without empowering political excesses, the architecture must decentralise authority while strengthening oversight. The following structure balances both imperatives.

Tier 1: Local Community Police (Professionalised Vigilantes)

This tier begins by formally integrating existing vigilante groups into recognised community policing units. Their mandate includes hyper-local patrols, intelligence gathering, dispute resolution, and acting as first responders to neighbourhood incidents.

Oversight is critical. These units should operate under Local Government Security Boards, with national training standards, licensing requirements, and technical supervision from the Office of the National Security Adviser. This maintains local advantage without placing direct operational control in the hands of governors.

Tier 2: State Police (Reformed NSCDC)

Rather than building a new state police structure from the ground up, Nigeria should transform the NSCDC into a functional State Police force. The Corps already commands grassroots trust and has an established command hierarchy; reforming it into a state-level police architecture is both cost-effective and institutionally sound.

Oversight must be layered. A Joint State–Federal Police Commission should approve promotions, budgets, and senior leadership. An independent Internal Affairs Unit must enforce discipline. The appointment of a State Police Inspector-General should follow a transparent, merit-based system insulated from partisan interference. This is how to decentralise without surrendering accountability.

Tier 3: Federal Police (Refocused NPF)

The Nigerian Police Force must be relieved of routine local duties and refocused entirely on national threats. These include terrorism, transnational banditry, kidnapping syndicates, cybercrime, border-related offences, and interstate criminal networks.

Refocusing the NPF transforms it into a leaner, more strategic institution—Nigeria’s equivalent of the FBI, ATF, and U.S. Marshals combined. This is how to build a federal force with both authority and precision.

Global Lessons: Decentralisation Is Not the Enemy

Large, diverse nations with complex security challenges have long recognised that decentralisation, when regulated, is the only sustainable path forward.

India operates a federal-state-local policing model where terrorism falls under central agencies while internal policing remains local. Brazil maintains distinct state-level policing units for patrol and investigations, ensuring no single point of failure. South Africa complements its national police with strong provincial units and community policing forums.

These systems demonstrate that the fear of political abuse can be addressed not by avoiding reform, but by embedding oversight, standards, and federal audits into the policing structure.

The Cost of Inaction

Nigeria cannot continue on this path of centralised paralysis. Banditry has outpaced the response capacity of the NPF. Communities now rely more on vigilante groups than on formal police. Local intelligence consistently proves more accurate than federal operations. Criminal elements exploit jurisdictional gaps between states, moving with impunity.

Believing that a single command in Abuja can manage this sprawling landscape is a dangerous illusion. Security is inherently local, and so must be the solution.

A National Imperative, Not a Partisan Debate

State policing is no longer a political football; it is a necessity. The framework proposed here is not radical—it is a structured, intelligent evolution of what already exists. It is smart because it builds on current assets. It is controlled because it embeds oversight at every level. It is professional because it insists on standards. It is localised because communities must have a direct security footprint. And it is resilient because it is designed to resist abuse.

Nigeria stands at a critical juncture. We can either cling to a centralised system that has repeatedly failed or commit to a smarter, more decentralised model capable of meeting today’s threats. The choice is not between reform and no reform. It is between managed reform and inevitable deterioration.

A safer Nigeria demands action, discipline, and courage. The time to build a policing system that is future-proof and abuse-proof is now.

Olu Allen writes on public affairs and promotes a pragmatic solution to challenges. He can be reached at [email protected]