After reading this column last week, in which I published a piece titled, “A ‘Mad Professor’s’ Analysis of My Latest Book: The Imperative of State Police in Nigeria,” a professor from the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife, Osun State, called me on the phone to inform me that he had read the article referenced above.
He described it as my review of the review by my book reviewer, Professor Anthony Kila, Jean Monnet Professor of Strategy and Development, who engaged in a rigorous scholarly critique that has turned out to be a thought-provoking review of this timely book, which has elicited even more excitement about the impending paradigm shift in policing.
This week, I am focusing on the presentation made during the unveiling of the same book by Mr. Nnadubem Moghalu, Secretary of the Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill and Senior Special Assistant to President Tinubu on Research and Planning.
Indeed, at the public presentation of my book, The Imperative of State Police in Nigeria, in Abuja on September 10, the most revealing moment was not my book itself, but the presentation that followed.
Mr. Moghalu delivered a paper titled “State Police: The Journey So Far.”
For readers who have followed this debate, Moghalu provided what we have lacked—a timeline.
He traced the journey from a mere agitation by governors to a formal federal initiative. According to him, the Working Group was inaugurated to move the debate from emotions to a constitutional and operational framework. He disclosed that all 36 states have now submitted memoranda in support, that the National Economic Council has deliberated on the matter, and that the Constitution Alteration Bill was before the National Assembly.
Since September 16, six days after the unveiling of my book, the bill has been transmitted to the states for the concurrence of at least 24 of the 36 states—representing a two-thirds majority—as mandated by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
What I found most instructive in Moghalu’s presentation was his honesty about the hurdles. He did not present state police as a magic wand. He flagged three critical questions that the Working Group is grappling with: funding and sustainability for less viable states, safeguards against abuse by governors, and the operational relationship between the federal and state police.
That is the real imperative.
My book argues why we need state police. Moghalu’s presentation showed how difficult it will be to get it right.
If his timeline is to be believed, Nigeria is closer to state policing than ever before. But closeness is not achievement.
As such, the Working Group must ensure that what we birth is not merely a decentralised version of the problems we currently have in the Nigeria Police Force—poor welfare, inadequate equipment, and insufficient training.
Below is the remarks by Nnadubem Moghalu, Senior Special Assistant to the President on Planning and Research and Secretary, Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill, at the public presentation of- the book, “The Imperative of State Police in Nigeria” by Magnus Onyibe | Abuja | 10 September 2026.
“State Policing Bill-The Journey So Far.
Mr Chairman, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.
I thank Mr Magnus Onyibe for inviting me to this presentation of The Imperative of State Police in Nigeria. He has brought an important subject before us, and I congratulate him on the publication.
I have been asked to give a brief account of the journey so far. The Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill, chaired by the Chief of Staff to the President, Rt Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila is working to translate the commitment to state policing into proposals that can withstand scrutiny and work in practice.
The starting point is familiar. A country of our size and diversity needs policing that is closer to the communities it serves. But proximity alone does not guarantee effective policing or responsible conduct. The arrangements must also protect the citizens from the misuse of police power. That concern runs through the work we are doing.
The work covers the proposed constitutional changes to permit state police and the wider legislative framework within which policing would operate. Among the questions being examined are the division of responsibilities between federal and state institutions, professional standards, and sustainable funding. There are equally serious questions about appointments, operational control, and how a citizen obtains redress when the police act unlawfully.
So far, the Secretariat has commenced operations, a policy outline has been adopted as the working basis for drafting, and work on the legislative proposals is underway. Alongside that technical work, we have deliberately made public engagement part of the process from the outset.
The call for public submissions gave people outside the formal structures of the Working Group an opportunity to contribute. That matters because the experience of policing varies considerably across the country. People who encounter the police in their daily lives have something to tell us about what works, what fails, and where protection is most urgently needed. Their experience belongs in this discussion.
The public briefing in August and subsequent media engagements have also served a practical purpose: to explain the assignment, address concerns about the timing of the exercise, and make clear how the proposals are being developed. We can not assume that the public understands the process simply because those of us working within it do.
At the recent Nigerian Bar Association conference, the discussion provided another opportunity to explain the direction of the work and engage with concerns about how state policing would operate. Some people see it as long overdue. Others worry that it could bring coercive power closer to political interests without bringing accountability any closer to the citizen. Those concerns deserve a serious hearing. They bear directly on the safeguards the proposals must address.
Public engagement must, therefore, continue as the work develops. Inviting submissions is one part of it. Explaining the choices under consideration and allowing those choices to be questioned is another. Today’s conversation is a useful contribution to that wider discussion, even as the Working Group and the Policy Advisory Committee carry out their respective assignments.
These questions require careful choices. It would be premature for me to announce particular arrangements here as settled positions. The Policy Advisory Committee has a defined role in reviewing and testing the proposals. Legal validation is also part of the process. Those stages must be allowed to do their work before final recommendations are made through the appropriate channels.
The Working Group’s responsibility is to prepare sound proposals. The constitutional and legislative decisions belong to the institutions entrusted with them. Our work must assist that process without anticipating its outcome.
That is where the journey stands: the work has moved into the detail of policy and drafting, with scrutiny and validation built into the process. I hope today’s discussion will help sharpen the questions that any credible framework must answer.
I thank Mr Onyibe once again for the invitation, and I look forward to the conversation.”
Mr. Moghalu’s presentation deserves commendation for bringing clarity to a noisy debate. The next step is to make that journey public, state by state, so that Nigerians can interrogate it.
Commendably, that step commenced on September 16, when the National Assembly transmitted the amended bill to the State Houses of Assembly for their consideration and concurrence, after which it will be transmitted to President Tinubu for his assent.
Impressively, Edo State has led the charge, as its lawmakers concurred on September 23—barely 10 days after the bill was transmitted by the National Assembly—thereby becoming the first of the 24 states constitutionally required to do so.
Historically, it is significant that Edo State is the home state of Chief Anthony Enahoro, an Esan man like the current governor of the state, Monday Okpebholo, who raised the motion in Parliament for Nigeria to become independent in 1960.
It is in the spirit of “Leading From The Streets,” which is the title of this column and the underlying reason for my engaging in mass-media interventions, that, on the sidelines of the public presentation of my new book, The Imperative of State Police in Nigeria, we organised a panel discussion with the theme: “Explaining the Grey Areas of State Police: The Case, The Strategy, The Operations and Framework.”
Hopefully, we achieved the theme of the event and purpose of the book which is to enlighten Nigerians.
Further to the transmission of the bill to the states by the federal lawmakers on September 16, after the Senate added 26 clauses and the House of Representatives added 18, we intend to unveil the book across the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria.
The House passed its version on June 10, 2026, while the Senate passed its own Executive version on June 24, 2026.
The differences between the two versions were why they had to go before a Conference Committee before the harmonised bill was transmitted to the states on September 16, 2026.
The key divergence is that both the Senate and the House of Representatives proposed a new Section 214 to replace the existing constitutional provisions relating to the Nigeria Police Force. However, the Senate introduced 15 new sub-clauses under the section, while the House introduced only seven.
It is also significant to note that the House passed its version on June 10, 2026, while the Senate passed its own Executive version on June 24, 2026.
The differences between the two versions necessitated their consideration by a Conference Committee before the harmonised bill was transmitted to the states on September 16, 2026.
The key divergence is that both chambers proposed a new Section 214, but the Senate introduced 15 new sub-clauses under it, while the House introduced only seven.
On Section 215, relating to appointment and control, the Senate titled it “Appointment, Command, Direction and Tenure” and refers to the head of a state police force as the “Commander.” The House, however, retained the title “Appointment of Inspector-General and Commissioner of Police” and refers to the head of the state police as the “Commissioner of Police of a State.”
On Section 216, the Senate titled the provision “National Police Standards, Oversight and Accountability,” while the House referred to it as “Removal of Inspector-General and Commissioner of Police of a State.”
The House also made limited amendments to Sections 34, 35, 39, 42, 89, 129, 153 and 197, while the Senate amended Sections 84, 89, 121, 124, 129, 157, 158, 160, 197, 201 and 202.
The Senate also introduced eight additional minor syntax clauses—Clauses 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23—to tighten the operational framework.
Overall, the Senate version was more expansive, particularly in providing safeguards against potential abuse by governors. These included provisions for federal intervention requiring written presidential authorisation and 48-hour notification to the Governor, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, the National Police Council and the National Assembly.
The statistics and analysis above matter because my book anticipated exactly this legislative tussle. Hence, I started writing it as soon as both the Federal and state governments agreed on the urgent need for the decentralisation of policing to curb the menace of insecurity, which started gradually in 1999 and exploded over the past decade or so, until it escalated to the current unacceptable levels, threatening the unity of Nigeria, therefore the reason for the ongoing process of intervention that has been initiated by president Tinubu.
By using our proposed regional unveiling of my book as an opportunity and platform to stimulate public debate on the proposed multi-level policing bill, which will result in the enlightenment of Nigerians at the subnational and grassroots levels about what to expect, while also obtaining their views on their aspirations and fears about the operation of state police in Nigeria, we will be helping the administration to close the gap.
And we will be doing so through a collaborative effort involving us, the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF), and the Conference of Speakers of Nigeria, through their support for the hosting of the book unveiling events and panel discussions on the policing bill in one state capital in each geopolitical zone.
For instance, Lagos can be the setting for the interactive session with the masses in the South-West region; Kaduna for the North-West; Maiduguri for the North-East; Enugu for the South-East; and Delta State for the South-South, while Kwara State will serve as the venue for the North-Central region.
In light of the fact that the most significant criticism of the process of birthing state police so far has been the lack of adequate consultation with a larger number of Nigerians through town hall meetings and other platforms, while the Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill has countered by stating that a website has been set up for the submission of memoranda by those interested in contributing to the debate, our proposal to leverage the public presentation of my book in the six geopolitical zones of our country to interface with the masses through dialogue will help bridge the gap between policymakers and members of the public.
That is because it will afford the government an opportunity to make up for not organising town hall meetings, which critics have cited as a fundamental defect in the process. That deficiency, however, can be addressed through our book unveiling events in the six regions, which will enable the administration to obtain more input from the masses.
It will hopefully also give the hoi polloi an avenue to interact with the framers of the proposed policing bill, thus giving the critical mass of Nigerians, who are the major stakeholders in security and safety matters, a sense of belonging and a possible buy-in into the unfolding multi-level policing system about to go into operation in Nigeria—one which all Nigerians need to key into.
It is remarkable that while my book is an intellectual argument, and Kila’s review is a scholarly dissection of my proposition against the backdrop of the current insecurity challenges bedevilling our country, Moghalu’s presentation is about the journey so far. It has enabled Nigerians to be abreast of developments in the security and safety space, which is a concern that is clearly at the top of the hierarchy of needs of all Nigerians.
At this point in time, many more positive strides, such as transmitting the bill to the state legislators for their input, have been accomplished, as the bill is currently receiving attention in multiple State Houses of Assembly nationwide.
So, it would not be out of place to conclude that the much-vaunted and much-anticipated reform of Nigeria’s policing system, which originated in 1999, is unstoppable.
However, in this season of politics, opposition politicians have argued that the timing was wrong, as they deemed it a ploy by the ruling APC to use state police to rig the forthcoming 2027 elections.
Fortuitously, perhaps due to the grim reality of the catastrophic effects of terrorism, banditry and kidnapping across the country, it would appear that politicians have now decided to avoid playing politics with the security of lives and property. Hence, the initial resistance to state policing by some political actors is no longer at the forefront of national discourse, as addressing insecurity is currently clearly on the priority list of all Nigerians.
Hopefully, the state legislators will conclude their work within the 30-day period recommended by the Clerk of the National Assembly. This deadline, however, is nominal, since state legislators at the subnational level are not constitutionally bound to comply with the Clerk’s deadline, as it lacks constitutional backing.
But with the ruling APC in the majority at both the national and state levels, controlling 32 of the 36 states, the party’s platform gives APC governors alone more than the two-thirds majority of states required by the Constitution to concur with the National Assembly on the constitutional amendment required to accommodate multi-level policing in Nigeria.
By all indications, passing the National Policing Bill and the constitutional amendment bill to accommodate multi-level policing seems to be a fait accompli, as it may sail through with or without the support of the opposition parties.
That is, if President Tinubu and the APC Chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, deploy their influence by weighing in on the matter to ensure that the policing system is decentralised in the next few weeks, or perhaps a couple of months, so that, hopefully, Nigerians can sleep with their two eyes closed if local policing accelerates the curbing of a hydra headed insecurity crisis whose manifestation has become unacceptably brutal and intolerably gruesome.
Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, an alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, a Commonwealth Institute scholar, and a former commissioner in the Delta State Government.
