In a recent letter addressed to the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Dr. George Akume, the former President of the Nigerian Bar Association welcomed President Bola Tinubu’s move to transmit an executive bill to the National Assembly seeking an amendment to Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution to establish state police.
Agbakoba described the proposal as “a welcome development” but warned that its success would depend on strong constitutional safeguards against political interference.
“I commend the President for transmitting to the National Assembly an executive Bill proposing the amendment of Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution to introduce the long-awaited state police. This is a welcome development that will, if properly implemented, enhance public security and bring law enforcement closer to the communities it serves,” he wrote.
The senior lawyer argued that the debate over state police should open the door to wider constitutional reforms aimed at devolving additional responsibilities from the Federal Government to states and local governments.
“Beyond the question of state police, the moment also invites a broader conversation. Having devolved policing, is it not time to consider further technical devolutions such as drivers’ licences, prisons, marriage registration, arbitration, trade regulation, registration of business names, and all other matters best suited for states and local governments, so as to relieve the federal government of responsibilities that can be more efficiently managed at the subnational level? These are reforms worth serious consideration,” he said.
Agbakoba, however, cautioned that creating state police without constitutional guarantees of independence could repeat the shortcomings of State Independent Electoral Commissions and local governments.
“I note the well-founded concern that state police may go the way of State Independent Electoral Commissions and local governments, institutions established with good intentions but ultimately captured by state executives and rendered ineffective.”
According to him, “Devolution without institutional protection is reform in name only, and history has shown that where institutions lack genuine constitutional protection, they inevitably become instruments of executive power rather than servants of the people and the Constitution.”
To address the challenge, Agbakoba pointed to South Africa’s constitutional framework as a model Nigeria should emulate.
“Nigeria need not look far for a tested solution. The Constitution of South Africa offers an instructive model,” the lawyer said.
He noted that Chapter 9 of South Africa’s Constitution establishes institutions supporting constitutional democracy and protects them from executive interference.
“These institutions are not merely created by statute. They derive their independence directly from the Constitution itself, with security of tenure for their heads, guaranteed funding, and accountability to Parliament rather than to the executive. The result is that in South Africa, neither the President nor any provincial governor can dictate to or manipulate these critical institutions,” Agbakoba wrote.
The legal practitioner urged Nigeria to extend similar constitutional protections to key public institutions, including the Nigeria Police Force, the Independent National Electoral Commission, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, the Central Bank of Nigeria, the National Judicial Council, the offices of the Attorney General and Accountant General, the National Human Rights Commission, the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Office of the Public Defender.
He added that the institutions “should be insulated from executive control and established as constitutionally protected institutions that consolidate democracy.”
According to Agbakoba, they “should enjoy security of tenure, their funding should be a direct charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and their accountability should be under the supervision of the National Assembly or the State Houses of Assembly and not the President or any Governor.”
Citing constitutional scholar Professor Ben Nwabueze, Agbakoba said the reforms reflect “the concept of limited government,” which he described as “the principle that executive power is not at large but is constrained by independent institutions guaranteed by the Constitution.”
He stressed that the proposed state police would only succeed if founded on that constitutional principle.
“If the proposed state police framework is built on this constitutional architecture of independence and accountability, it is a welcome and progressive development. If not, if state police are simply handed to governors without these protections, they will inevitably become tools of oppression, and Nigeria will have traded one problem for a far worse one,” he said.
Agbakoba also proposed an appointment and removal process designed to prevent any arm of government from exercising unilateral control over state police leadership.
“What we recommend is an interlocking appointment, funding, and removal process like that which governs the judiciary, in which all three arms of government play a defined and balancing role,” the senior lawyer said.
He explained that under the proposed arrangement, “the Police Service Commission would identify and recommend suitably qualified candidates to the Governor; the Governor would exercise the power of appointment; and the State House of Assembly would confirm the appointment.”
“The same tripartite structure should govern removal, so that no single arm of government can unilaterally install or dislodge the head of the police. This architecture of shared constitutional responsibility is the surest guarantee against executive capture and the politicisation of law enforcement,” Agbakoba wrote, expressing hope that the Federal Government would give careful attention to the recommendations.