Balancing Local Autonomy and National Unity: Governors and the State Police Debate
By: Adamu S Ladan
Last week, Nigeria’s state governors, under the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF), have finally lend their support for the establishment of state police as a measure to address the country’s persistent security challenges.
Hitherto, the nation was divided on this issue. At a point almost tearing the country along north-south divide. With the north in particular vehemently opposed to the idea.
During a meeting with President Bola Tinubu, according to news media, the governors agreed on the need for enhanced security mechanisms and pledged to work on the practicalities of implementing the state policing. The discussions was reported to have centered on aligning the initiative with existing federal structures and ensuring proper oversight and funding.
The resolution followed extensive dialogue on the roles of both federal and state governments in combating insecurity, particularly as the current security apparatus struggles with issues like manpower shortages and rising crime rates.
The meeting according to the reports was also said to have addressed broader strategies to reduce unemployment and improve food security, which are seen as complementary measures to enhance national stability.
Those who favour the governors’ decision are of the opinion that the state police can address security challenges more effectively by tailoring their operations to the unique needs and cultural dynamics of each state.
Establishing state police it’s believed would lessen the strain on federal policing, allowing the Nigeria Police Force to focus on broader national security issues.
State police if handled well may also foster greater trust between law enforcement and local communities, as officers are likely to be from the same regions they serve, understanding the local customs and languages.
Establishing state police would also help create jobs and the attendant economic benefits to the local communities.
Governors and state governments would have direct oversight on the security thus, potentially improving accountability and responsiveness as opposed to prevailing situation where the governors don’t have absolute control over the security apparatus which is more centralized.
However, in as much as the issue of decentralized governance structure of our security carries along with it some positive outcomes, it is imperative to take cognizance of the fact that we must subject it to comprehensive scrutiny to chart a path forward that ensures both security and sustainable post-conflict results.
Already, in all the geopolitical zones across the nation, states have embraced decentralized local security arrangements reminiscent of pre-colonial times.
These arrangements, characterized by community-led vigilante groups and volunteer forces, have proven effective in responding to crime swiftly and leveraging local knowledge for intelligence gathering.
While these measures have yielded some positive results to some extent, concerns persist regarding their long-term sustainability and post-conflict outcomes.
Some of these concerns include the risk of politicization of the state police. Critics are apprehensive that the force could be manipulated by governors or state leaders to suppress political opposition or enforce partisan agendas, particularly during elections.
Another fear by some is that of biases in recruitment and deployment which accoding to observers could lead to tensions, especially in regions with a history of ethnic or religious conflicts.
As many states struggle with financial sustainability, establishing and maintaining a state police force could strain the already limited resources, potentially leading to inefficiency or corruption. Although Wealthier states may be able to fund and equip their police better than poorer ones, this may however lead to unequal security outcomes across the country and resulting to security disparities.
Introducing state police may as well lead to coordination challenges between federal and state forces, especially in cases of cross-border crimes.
As we strive to address these challenges then, the role of the Federal Government in regulating such initiatives through legislation becomes paramount.
Sometime this year the National Assembly conducted dialogue sessions, including discussions on pending legislation regarding the state police. The initiative underscored the importance of federal oversight in ensuring a seamless and coordinated approach to security governance.
As a major stakeholder therefore, it is essential for the National Assembly to recognize Nigeria’s heterogeneous and evolving democracy, where the contest for power remains a major security concern.
The National Assembly should play an active role in providing legislation that not only defines the functioning of the security sector but also takes into account the diverse needs and levels of development across the country.
This legislation should ensure compatibility with international law, norms, and standards while safeguarding human rights and addressing religious, ethnic, and gender sensitivities.
While proponents of state police often highlight successes in other environments, it is essential to consider the potential pitfalls of such arrangements. Examples from countries like Ethiopia, where regional control over armed forces has led to civil unrest, and the United States, where varying police regulations have posed challenges to cohesion, serve as cautionary tales.
In light of these considerations, while advocating for a nuanced approach to addressing security challenges, the National Assembly ought to strive to achieve unified security outcomes across the federation.
The varying economic, demographic, and social factors across states will undoubtedly influence the viability of state police arrangements, necessitating careful deliberation and tailored solutions.
By fostering collaboration between federal and state governments, leveraging international lessons, and prioritizing legislation that ensures unified security outcomes, we can indeed chart a course towards lasting peace and security in our beloved nation.
Furthermore, it is imperative that we underscore the critical importance of informed decision-making and strategic guidance in our efforts to promote peace, security, and resilience in the country.
The need for expert advisory committees to independently guide the government on security matters is in this regard paramount. Driving lessons from other climes it’s indeed over stating the obvious stressing the significance of establishing such committees and their pivotal role in addressing the security challenges facing our nation.
Expert advisory committee would play a crucial role in providing evidence-based analysis, strategic insights, and policy recommendations in decision-making while navigating the intricate landscape of security governance.
The administration of former president Goodluck Jonathan experimented this initiative and worked out well to certain extent. The committee which comprised of seasoned professionals, scholars, and practitioners with diverse expertise in security studies, intelligence analysis, conflict resolution, and law enforcement, served as invaluable resources for enhancing the effectiveness and responsiveness of the government initiatives.
One of the key attributes of expert advisory committee however, is its independence and impartiality. By operating outside the confines of political influence and bureaucratic constraints, such committee at both states and national levels would offer unbiased assessments and recommendations based solely on empirical evidence and expert analysis.
This independence is essential for ensuring the integrity and credibility of its findings, thereby instilling public trust and confidence in government actions.
The committees would serve as forums for rigorous analysis, strategic foresight, and policy innovation, providing invaluable guidance to government agencies tasked with addressing the complex security dynamics in the states and country at large.
From assessing emerging threats to identifying best practices and recommending targeted interventions, the expertise and insights of the committee members can inform and enhance the effectiveness of government strategies and initiatives.
It is also imperative that we recognize the critical importance of synergy and coordination among various security outfits, traditional leadership, and local government administrations in implementing effective strategies to combat security challenges in the country.
Therefore, it is imperative that we prioritize efforts to enhance coordination and cooperation among stakeholders at all levels in the country.
Finally, while state police could improve localized security and efficiency, its implementation in a heterogeneous and politically complex country like Nigeria must be carefully managed. Safeguards are needed to prevent abuse, ensure equitable funding, and foster cooperation between federal and state forces.
Adamu Ladan is a media consultant and public affairs analyst
