State Police in Nigeria: Why Governors Otu and Odama’s Stance Is a Red Flag for 2026

Why State Police Nigeria Is Back in the National Conversation

The push for state police Nigeria has resurfaced in 2026, this time championed by prominent governors like Bassey Otu of Cross River and Denis Odama of Benue. While their advocacy is framed as a solution to Nigeria’s worsening insecurity, the proposal carries grave implications for the country’s unity, federalism, and long-term stability. Critics warn that creating state-controlled police forces could deepen regional divisions, exacerbate ethnic tensions, and undermine the fragile cohesion that has held Africa’s most populous nation together since 1960. This debate is not new, but its timing in 2026—amid simmering separatist agitations and worsening banditry—demands urgent scrutiny.

The idea of state police is not inherently flawed; many federal systems around the world, including the United States, Germany, and India, operate with decentralised policing. However, Nigeria’s peculiar history of ethnic mistrust, weak institutions, and overcentralised power makes the model uniquely dangerous. Without robust constitutional safeguards, state police could become instruments of political coercion, patronage, or even secessionist agendas. As Governor Otu and Odama rally support, it is essential to interrogate whether Nigeria is truly ready for such a seismic shift—or whether the risks far outweigh the benefits.

Governor Bassey Otu and Denis Odama: Champions or Catalysts of Division?

Governor Bassey Otu, a former federal lawmaker and advocate for resource control, has long argued that Nigeria’s security challenges require localised solutions. His stance reflects a broader sentiment among southern governors that the federal police, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), is overstretched and unresponsive to regional peculiarities. Similarly, Governor Denis Odama of Benue, a state ravaged by herder-farmer clashes, has repeatedly called for state police as a means to restore order. Both leaders frame their position in the language of empowerment and responsiveness, arguing that governors, as elected leaders, are best positioned to manage security in their domains.

Yet, their advocacy raises critical questions: Are they genuinely concerned about security, or are they leveraging the state police debate to advance political agendas? In 2024, Odama’s Benue State witnessed violent clashes between farmers and herders, and critics accuse his administration of failing to implement lasting solutions. Similarly, Otu’s Cross River has grappled with cult violence and kidnappings, despite its relatively low population density. If state police were operational today, would these governors have the capacity—or the will—to manage them effectively? The lack of clear answers underscores the urgency of scrutinising their motives.

Moreover, the timing of their push is telling. With Nigeria’s 2027 general elections looming, the state police debate has become entangled in partisan politics. Some analysts suggest that governors are using the issue to position themselves as champions of restructuring, a narrative that resonates with southern electorates disillusioned by the federal government’s handling of insecurity. Whether this strategy will translate into electoral gains remains to be seen, but it is clear that the state police debate is no longer purely about security—it is also about power.

The Historical Roots of Nigeria’s Police Centralisation

To understand the dangers of state police Nigeria, it is necessary to revisit the country’s post-colonial history. Upon independence in 1960, Nigeria inherited a police force modelled after the British colonial system, which prioritised centralised control to maintain law and order across diverse regions. The Nigeria Police Force (NPF) was designed to serve as a unifying institution, bridging ethnic and regional divides. However, the civil war of 1967–70 exposed the limitations of this model, as regional militias and vigilante groups emerged to fill the security vacuum left by the federal police.

In the decades since, Nigeria has oscillated between calls for police reform and reaffirmations of centralisation. The 1999 Constitution, which remains in force today, explicitly vests policing powers in the federal government, a provision that has drawn criticism from states seeking greater autonomy. Proponents of state police argue that the NPF is underfunded, poorly trained, and susceptible to political interference—a critique that gained traction during the #EndSARS protests of 2020, when Nigerians nationwide demanded police reform. Yet, the solution to these problems may not lie in further decentralisation, but in strengthening the existing system through better funding, community policing, and accountability mechanisms.

Critics of state police point to historical precedents where regional policing exacerbated conflicts. During the First Republic (1960–66), regional governments operated their own police forces, which were often used to suppress political opponents or marginalised groups. For example, the Western Region’s “Agbekoya” rebellion in 1968–69 was partly fuelled by grievances against the regional police’s heavy-handed tactics. Similarly, in the 1980s and 1990s, some state governors in the Niger Delta used local security outfits to intimidate opposition figures or protect oil installations, often at the expense of civilian safety. These examples serve as cautionary tales, illustrating how state police can become tools of oppression rather than guardians of justice.

How State Police Could Deepen Nigeria’s Fault Lines

The most pressing danger of state police Nigeria is the potential to deepen the country’s already pronounced ethnic and regional fault lines. Nigeria is a nation of over 250 ethnic groups, with each state dominated by one or more major groups. In a system where state governors control police forces, the risk of politicisation and ethnic favouritism is high. For instance, a governor from the Igbo ethnic group in Enugu State might deploy state police to suppress rival factions from the Hausa or Yoruba communities, or vice versa. Such dynamics could reignite old grievances and fuel separatist movements, particularly in regions like the South East, South West, and Niger Delta, where demands for self-determination remain strong.

Another concern is the financial burden of state police. Establishing and maintaining a state police force would require significant resources, including recruitment, training, equipment, and salaries. While wealthy states like Lagos or Rivers might afford this, poorer states—particularly in the North Central and North East—would struggle to fund their own security apparatuses. This could lead to a two-tier security system, where some states are well-protected while others become hotspots for crime and insurgency. The resulting inequality would not only undermine national cohesion but also create new flashpoints for conflict.

Furthermore, state police could exacerbate the militarisation of politics. In Nigeria, where political competition is often fierce and violent, governors already wield considerable influence over security agencies. Introducing state police would give them even greater control over law enforcement, raising concerns about the weaponisation of police against opponents, journalists, or civil society actors. This risk is particularly acute in states with histories of electoral violence, such as Kano, Kaduna, or Plateau. Without strict constitutional safeguards and independent oversight, state police could become extensions of political patronage, further eroding Nigeria’s democratic institutions.

Comparing Nigeria to Other African Federal Systems

Nigeria is not alone in grappling with the challenges of policing in a federal system. Across Africa, countries like South Africa, Ethiopia, and Kenya have experimented with decentralised policing, with mixed results. South Africa’s 1996 Constitution allows for provincial policing, but the system has been criticised for inefficiency and lack of coordination. Similarly, Ethiopia’s federal police structure has struggled to manage ethnic tensions, particularly in regions like Tigray and Oromia. Kenya, which adopted a decentralised policing model in 2010, has seen some successes in community policing but also faces challenges with corruption and political interference.

What sets Nigeria apart, however, is the scale of its diversity and the intensity of its security challenges. Unlike South Africa, which has nine provinces, or Ethiopia, which has 10 regional states, Nigeria has 36 states and a Federal Capital Territory. Each state has its own ethnic composition, economic realities, and security needs, making a one-size-fits-all approach to policing nearly impossible. Moreover, Nigeria’s security threats—from Boko Haram in the North East to banditry in the North West, herder-farmer clashes in the Middle Belt, and separatist agitations in the South East—are complex and interconnected. A fragmented police system could struggle to address these challenges cohesively, leading to gaps in intelligence-sharing and operational coordination.

Another critical difference is Nigeria’s history of military rule and centralised governance. Unlike Kenya or South Africa, which transitioned to federalism after decades of authoritarian rule, Nigeria’s federal structure was inherited from colonialism and reinforced by military dictatorships. This legacy has left a deep-seated distrust of state-level institutions, particularly in regions that have historically been marginalised. For state police to succeed in Nigeria, it would require not just constitutional amendments but also a cultural shift towards trust in regional governance—a shift that has yet to materialise.

Alternatives to State Police: Strengthening Community Policing

Rather than rushing into the state police Nigeria debate, policymakers should explore alternatives that address the root causes of insecurity without fragmenting the police force. One such alternative is community policing, a model that emphasises collaboration between law enforcement and local communities to prevent and solve crimes. Community policing has gained traction in several Nigerian states, including Lagos, Oyo, and Kaduna, where it has been credited with reducing crime rates and improving public trust in the police.

Under a community policing framework, local vigilante groups, neighbourhood watch teams, and traditional institutions work alongside the NPF to address security challenges. For example, the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) in the South West and the Hisbah Corps in Kano State have played significant roles in maintaining order in their respective regions. While these groups have faced criticism for overreach, they also demonstrate the potential of localised security solutions when properly regulated. By formalising and integrating these structures into the NPF, Nigeria could achieve many of the benefits of state police—such as local responsiveness and cultural sensitivity—without the risks of fragmentation and politicisation.

Another alternative is to reform the NPF itself, addressing its well-documented challenges of corruption, underfunding, and poor training. The #EndSARS protests of 2020 exposed the NPF’s systemic failures, prompting the federal government to announce reforms, including the establishment of the Nigeria Police Trust Fund to improve welfare and training. However, progress has been slow, and many Nigerians remain sceptical about the government’s commitment to genuine reform. To rebuild trust, the NPF must demonstrate transparency, accountability, and a commitment to community engagement. This could include measures such as independent oversight bodies, whistleblower protections, and regular public consultations on security priorities.

Finally, Nigeria could explore hybrid models that combine elements of federal and state policing. For example, states could be given limited authority over certain aspects of policing, such as traffic control or local crime prevention, while leaving core law enforcement functions to the NPF. This approach would allow for greater local input without the risks associated with fully autonomous state police forces. Countries like Germany and Switzerland employ such hybrid models, with success. Adapting these models to Nigeria’s context could provide a balanced solution that addresses regional concerns while preserving national unity.

The Role of the National Assembly in the State Police Debate

The National Assembly, Nigeria’s bicameral legislature, holds the key to whether state police Nigeria becomes a reality. In 2023, the Senate considered a constitutional amendment to allow for state police, but the proposal stalled due to opposition from lawmakers who feared it could exacerbate insecurity and ethnic tensions. As of September 2026, the debate has resurfaced, with some senators arguing that the current security challenges justify a decentralised approach. However, others remain unconvinced, citing the risks of fragmentation and the lack of safeguards to prevent abuse.

For any constitutional amendment to pass, it would require a two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, as well as approval from at least two-thirds of Nigeria’s 36 state assemblies. Given the deep divisions on the issue, securing such a supermajority will be an uphill battle. Moreover, even if the amendment passes, implementing state police would require extensive logistical and financial planning, as well as buy-in from state governors, who would need to demonstrate capacity and integrity in managing their own security forces.

The National Assembly must also consider the broader implications of state police for Nigeria’s federalism. The 1999 Constitution already grants states significant autonomy in areas such as education, health, and local government administration. Adding policing to this list could set a precedent for further decentralisation, potentially leading to demands for regional control over other critical sectors, such as the judiciary or revenue allocation. While some advocates of restructuring may welcome this, others fear it could weaken the federal government’s ability to address national challenges, such as insurgency or economic crises. The National Assembly must weigh these trade-offs carefully before proceeding with any amendments.

Public Opinion and the State Police Nigeria Divide

Public opinion on state police Nigeria is deeply divided, reflecting the country’s complex social and political landscape. In the South West, where states like Lagos and Oyo have experimented with community policing, there is cautious support for greater state involvement in security. For example, a 2025 survey by NOI Polls found that 58% of Lagos residents supported the idea of state police, citing the need for localised solutions to crime. Similarly, in the South South, where resource control is a major issue, some stakeholders argue that state police could help protect oil installations and address environmental crimes.

However, in the North West and North East, where insecurity is most acute, there is widespread scepticism about state police. Many residents fear that regional police forces could be dominated by ethnic or political elites, leading to further marginalisation of minority groups. For instance, in Zamfara State, where banditry has displaced thousands, locals have expressed concerns that a state police force could be co-opted by political godfathers or used to suppress dissent. These fears are not unfounded; in 2021, Zamfara’s state government was accused of arming vigilante groups to combat bandits, a move that later spiralled into inter-communal violence.

The divide in public opinion is also evident among civil society groups. While some organisations, such as the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), have called for police reform, they have stopped short of endorsing state police. Instead, they advocate for measures such as community policing, police accountability, and the implementation of the 2019 Police Reform Act. On the other hand, groups like the Ohanaeze Ndigbo and the Afenifere Renewal Group have thrown their weight behind state police, arguing that it is a necessary step towards restructuring Nigeria. This polarisation underscores the need for inclusive dialogue before any constitutional amendments are made.

Lessons from Nigeria’s Neighbours: What Ghana and Kenya Can Teach Us

Nigeria is not the only African country grappling with the challenges of policing in a federal system. Ghana and Kenya, two of Africa’s most stable democracies, offer valuable lessons on the risks and rewards of decentralised policing. Ghana, which operates a unitary system, has experimented with regional police commands, but has stopped short of creating fully autonomous state police forces. Instead, the Ghana Police Service has focused on community policing and intelligence-led operations, with some success in reducing crime rates in urban areas like Accra and Kumasi.

Kenya, which adopted a decentralised policing model after its 2010 constitution, has seen mixed results. The country’s 47 county police forces, known as the County Policing Authority (CPA), were intended to improve local responsiveness and reduce crime. However, critics argue that the system has been plagued by corruption, ethnic favouritism, and poor coordination with the national police. For example, in 2022, clashes between pastoralists and farmers in Laikipia County were exacerbated by the county government’s failure to deploy police effectively. Similarly, in 2024, allegations of police brutality by county officers in Nairobi led to protests and calls for reform. These examples highlight the risks of decentralising policing without robust oversight and accountability mechanisms.

What these cases demonstrate is that decentralisation alone is not a panacea for insecurity. For state police to work in Nigeria, it would need to be accompanied by strong constitutional safeguards, independent oversight bodies, and a commitment to transparency and accountability. Without these, the risks of abuse, politicisation, and fragmentation could outweigh the benefits. Nigeria’s leaders must learn from the experiences of its neighbours and avoid repeating their mistakes.

Economic Implications: Can States Afford Their Own Police Forces?

One of the most overlooked aspects of the state police Nigeria debate is the economic cost. Establishing and maintaining a state police force would require significant financial resources, including recruitment, training, equipment, and salaries. For wealthy states like Lagos, Rivers, or Ogun, this may be feasible, but for poorer states—particularly in the North East and North West—it could be a crippling burden. According to a 2025 report by the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), only 12 of Nigeria’s 36 states have the fiscal capacity to fund a state police force without compromising other critical services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

The financial strain could also exacerbate existing inequalities between states. For example, a state like Kano, which has a large population and significant security challenges, would require a larger police force than a smaller state like Ekiti. Yet, Kano’s revenue base is already stretched thin by the need to fund schools, hospitals, and roads. If the federal government were to mandate state police without providing adequate funding, Kano and other states could be forced to cut essential services or take on unsustainable debt to meet their security obligations. This could lead to a vicious cycle of underdevelopment and insecurity, particularly in regions already grappling with poverty and unemployment.

Another economic concern is the potential for state police to become vehicles for corruption. In Nigeria, where public office is often seen as a means to personal enrichment, there is a risk that state governors could use their police forces to extort businesses, suppress political opponents, or protect their allies. This is not a hypothetical scenario; in 2023, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) uncovered a scheme in which a state governor allegedly used a state-sponsored security outfit to intimidate business rivals and siphon public funds. If state police were to become widespread, such practices could become even more entrenched, further eroding public trust in governance.</p

What Nigeria’s Youth and Civil Society Want from the Police Reform Debate

Nigeria’s youth—who make up over 60% of the population—are among the most vocal advocates for police reform. For this demographic, the state police Nigeria debate is less about constitutional amendments and more about tangible improvements in their daily lives. Many young Nigerians have grown up in an era of worsening insecurity, economic hardship, and political disillusionment. For them, the idea of state police represents a glimmer of hope that their communities could take control of their own security. However, their support is conditional on transparency, accountability, and a commitment to addressing the root causes of crime, such as unemployment and poor governance.

Civil society organisations (CSOs) have also played a crucial role in shaping the discourse around police reform. Groups like the #BringBackOurGirls Campaign, the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), and the Nigerian Human Rights Commission (NHRC) have consistently called for an end to police brutality, extrajudicial killings, and corruption within the NPF. While some CSOs support the idea of state police in principle, they emphasise the need for robust safeguards to prevent abuse. For example, the CDD has recommended that any state police model include independent oversight bodies, community representation in police governance, and strict limits on the powers of state governors over their police forces.

The youth and civil society’s demands highlight a critical point: the state police Nigeria debate cannot be reduced to a binary choice between centralisation and decentralisation. Instead, it must be framed as part of a broader agenda for police reform, governance, and social justice. For state police to gain widespread acceptance, it must be accompanied by measures that address the underlying issues of poverty, unemployment, and political marginalisation that fuel insecurity. Without these, state police could become just another tool of oppression in the hands of Nigeria’s political elite.

Constitutional Safeguards: Can Nigeria Get State Police Right?

The success or failure of state police Nigeria hinges on the constitutional safeguards put in place to prevent abuse. Without these, the risks of ethnic favouritism, political interference, and corruption could render the model unworkable. Several key safeguards have been proposed by legal experts, policymakers, and civil society groups. These include:

• Independent Oversight Bodies: A federal police commission, similar to the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) or the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), could be established to oversee state police forces and investigate allegations of abuse. This body would have the power to discipline officers, prosecute misconduct, and ensure compliance with national laws.
• Community Representation in Police Governance: State police commands could include representatives from local governments, traditional institutions, and civil society to ensure that policing priorities reflect community needs. For example, the Lagos State Neighbourhood Safety Corps, which operates under the state government, includes community leaders in its decision-making processes.
• Strict Limits on State Governor Powers: Governors should not have unilateral control over state police forces. Instead, police commands could be accountable to a state police board, with members appointed through a transparent process involving the state assembly, judiciary, and civil society. This would reduce the risk of governors using state police to intimidate opponents or suppress dissent.
• Standardised Training and Equipment: To prevent disparities in policing standards, the federal government could establish a national framework for training, equipment, and operational protocols. This would ensure that state police forces meet minimum standards of professionalism and accountability, regardless of the state’s financial capacity.
• Clear Jurisdictional Boundaries: The constitution should clearly define the roles and responsibilities of state police forces, particularly in cases where crimes cross state boundaries. For example, a state police force should not have the authority to investigate crimes committed in another state without the consent of the federal police or the affected state.

Even with these safeguards, however, the risk of state police becoming instruments of oppression remains high. Nigeria’s history is replete with examples of institutions that were designed to serve the public but were later co-opted by political elites. For state police to succeed, it would require not just constitutional amendments but also a cultural shift towards transparency, accountability, and respect for the rule of law. This is a tall order in a country where impunity is the norm, but it is not impossible. The question is whether Nigeria’s leaders have the political will to make it happen.

Looking Ahead: What’s Next for the State Police Nigeria Debate?

As of September 2026, the state police Nigeria debate is at a crossroads. Governors Otu and Odama’s advocacy has brought the issue to the forefront of national discourse, but it has also exposed deep divisions among Nigerians. The National Assembly is under pressure to act, but the risks of fragmentation and abuse loom large. Meanwhile, insecurity continues to ravage the country, with banditry, kidnappings, and separatist agitations showing no signs of abating. In this context, the temptation to embrace state police as a quick fix is understandable—but it is also dangerous.

For state police to become a viable solution, Nigeria must first address the underlying issues that have undermined its security architecture for decades. This includes reforming the NPF, strengthening community policing, and tackling the root causes of crime, such as poverty, unemployment, and political marginalisation. It also requires a commitment to inclusive dialogue, where the voices of civil society, youth, and marginalised communities are heard and respected. Without these steps, state police could become just another failed experiment in Nigeria’s long history of governance missteps.

Looking ahead to 2027, the state police debate will likely intensify as Nigeria approaches its next general elections. Governors Otu, Odama, and their allies will continue to push for decentralisation, while opponents will warn of the risks of fragmentation. The outcome of this debate will have profound implications for Nigeria’s future—whether as a united, cohesive nation or a fractured collection of regions locked in perpetual conflict. The choice is not just about policing; it is about the kind of country Nigeria wants to be. Will it be a nation that embraces diversity and empowers its states, or one that succumbs to the centrifugal forces of ethnic and political division? The answer will shape Nigeria’s destiny for generations to come.

Frequently Asked Questions About State Police in Nigeria

1. What is state police, and how would it work in Nigeria?

   State police refers to a decentralised policing model where state governments, rather than the federal government, control and manage police forces within their territories. In Nigeria, this would require a constitutional amendment to transfer policing powers from the federal government to state governments. State police forces would be responsible for local law enforcement, crime prevention, and community policing, while the federal police would retain jurisdiction over national security threats, interstate crimes, and federal institutions.

2. What are the main arguments in favour of state police?

   Proponents of state police argue that it would improve security by allowing governors to deploy police forces tailored to their states’ unique needs. They contend that local control would enhance responsiveness, reduce response times, and foster community trust in law enforcement. Additionally, state police is seen as a step towards restructuring Nigeria, giving states greater autonomy in governance. Governors like Bassey Otu and Denis Odama have framed it as a solution to the federal police’s perceived inefficiency and corruption.

3. What are the biggest risks of implementing state police in Nigeria?

   The risks of state police include ethnic and political favouritism, where state governors use police forces to suppress opponents or marginalise minority groups. There are also concerns about financial burden, as poorer states may struggle to fund their own police forces. Additionally, state police could exacerbate insecurity by fragmenting the police force, leading to gaps in intelligence-sharing and operational coordination. Historical precedents, such as the misuse of regional police during Nigeria’s First Republic, serve as cautionary tales.

Source: Naija News

Editor’s Note: This article examines the complexities of the state police debate in Nigeria through the lens of Governor Bassey Otu and Denis Odama’s advocacy. While their concerns about insecurity are valid, the risks of decentralising policing in Nigeria’s fragile federal system cannot be ignored. The piece aims to provide a balanced analysis of the pros and cons, drawing on historical examples, comparative insights from other African nations, and expert opinions. The goal is to foster informed dialogue on a topic that will shape Nigeria’s future in 2026 and beyond.

Related Reading

• 1password’s $300k Linux Sponsorship Sparks Free Speech and Ethics Debate in 2026
• Root Causes of Terrorism and Insurgency in Nigeria — DSS DG Breaks It Down
• Nigerian Police Clarify Viral Drone Video as Yoruba Movie Scene