A public affairs analyst, Dr. Ambrose Igboke, has argued that the proposed creation of state police in Nigeria would be ineffective unless state governors are granted the exclusive power to appoint State Commissioners of Police.
Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Tajudeen Abbas, had, during the National Security Roundtable held last week in Abuja as part of the 2026 National Assembly Open Week, said that under the proposed constitutional amendment, a state’s Commissioner of Police would not be appointed solely by the governor but through a process involving the National Police Council and the State House of Assembly.
Explaining the proposed appointment process, Abbas said: “A state appoints its Commissioner of Police on the recommendation of the National Police Council. The State Assembly must confirm that appointment, and only a two-thirds majority of the Assembly can remove the officer, and even then, only for good cause.”
However, Igboke, who is the Chairman of the Guild of Public Affairs Analysts, Enugu State Chapter, told The News Chronicle in an interview in Enugu that any arrangement allowing the Federal Government to retain control over the leadership of state police formations would defeat the purpose of the reform.
According to him, if the President or the Federal Government continues to appoint key officers such as State Commissioners of Police under the proposed state policing framework, the reform would amount to a mere change in name rather than genuine decentralisation of policing.
“If they still want to maintain the present Federal Police structure where the President appoints the AIGs and Commissioners of Police, they should not waste our time,” he said.
He maintained that governors should have full authority to appoint State Commissioners of Police since they would be held accountable for security in their respective states.
“If there is going to be State Police, then the state governors should be responsible for appointing the Commissioners of Police so they can be fully responsible for giving directives on security in their states, as well as for its successes and failures,” he added.
The analyst expressed concern that some proponents of state policing were still advocating a system that would leave the Federal Government with significant control over state police operations.
“I don’t know why we are talking about State Police and some people are still trying to ensure that the Federal Police remain in control of the state police somehow. It shouldn’t be,” he stated.
Igboke called on state governors to use their influence through members of the National Assembly to resist any constitutional amendment that would diminish their authority over the proposed state police structure.
He also urged the Nigeria Governors’ Forum to take a firm position against any proposal that would allow the Federal Government to participate in appointing State Commissioners of Police.
According to him, such an arrangement would undermine the objective of establishing state police and defeat the purpose of decentralising security administration.
He further argued that the Federal Government should restrict its policing responsibilities to federal offences, while state governments should be responsible for policing crimes committed within their jurisdictions.
Questioning the rationale for federal involvement in state police appointments, Igboke asked whether the Federal Government also intended to fund state police operations.
“You cannot want to hold authority when you don’t want to take responsibility,” he said.
He warned that allowing the Federal Government to retain control over appointments in state police formations would amount to “motion without movement,” insisting that meaningful police reform requires granting states full operational and administrative control over their police forces.
