THE NIGERIA POLICE AND POLICING

THE NIGERIA POLICE AND POLICING

Federalism in Nigeria today is no doubt defective. May be some if not most of these defects would have been addressed in the attempt at Constitutional amendment in 2006 were it not for the vaunted ambition of a cluster of political elites/jobbers to remain relevant in the corridors of power forever. They cajoled and convinced then President Olusegun Obasanjo that his fate was inexorably tied with that of Nigeria, the man himself was sure of his place and destiny within the larger historical alchemy of Nigeria. The pro and anti Obasanjo sentiments ran high at the consequent constitutional debates on account of what notoriously became known as the third term saga. At the end of the horse trading that the Constitution amendment debates became, the baby was thrown away with the bathwater as on account of third term alone, the national assembly aborted the Constitutional review process when in May 2006, the assembly voted not to continue the constitution review exercise.

There are so many vexatious and contentious issues in the Nigerian federation and with that, we lost the opportunity to take a second look at the issues and then decide one way or the other. Some of the most contentious of these issues includes Local Government Creation and Administration, Independent candidacy for purposes of elections, the proper derivative formula, the Immunity Clause and State Police. So many provisions in the Constitution that could do with some reformation but thus far, the most contentious and difficult is the question of State police or a local police or better still community policing as some would describe it. As would be expected, this issue became a major point of debate at the 1st Kafaru Oluwole Tinubu Memorial Lecture at the NIIA on the 18th of March 2008, a Lecture which chose as theme “The Rule of Law and the Role of the Police in an Emerging Democracy”. The Attorney General of Lagos State, Olasupo Sashore (SAN), in his presentation argued for some form of control of the Police force by the component states of the federation as it is clearly antithetical in a federation to have a centrally controlled police while designating a Governor as Chief Security Officer of a State with a police force he clearly cannot control and which takes no orders from him. The Governor of Lagos State, Babatunde Raji Fashola was himself present at the occasion and he shed more light on what Lagos meant by a State Controlled Police. Essentially, his reasoning which is congruent with federalism is that all State’s should be afforded the opportunity to determine the number, character and welfare of the police its circumstances demand rather than this ‘one size fits all approach’ of the federal government. According to him, matters of policy and training could remain in the hands of the federal authorities. True, as it is only delusory to carry on as we currently do. The security needs of Yobe state for example cannot be the same as that of Lagos State. The dynamics do not match. Other contributors at the Lecture had something interesting to say about the issue of state police. One of the important arguments against a state controlled police is the fear of the abuse to which it might be put by state governors. There is the fear that a state police controlled by the governor of the state will merely be an appendage of the ruling party in that state at the beck and call of the governor to settle political scores and their fear is not unfounded but to assume that all the 36 governors of the State’s will do this is merely begging the question.

To drive home the urgency of the situation, I read elsewhere a piece delivered by the Governor of Lagos state on March 25, 2008 where he posited that “when we realize that the greatest challenge that we have today is one of law and order, the danger to our democracy of a central police becomes manifestly clear…the existence in Nigeria of an exclusive federal police is a major stumbling block at evolving a community based police structure that enables the state and local government to respond to local security demand. Security is essentially a local matter. Each State has its peculiar security problems which are well within the knowledge of States and Local Government Councils. A Federal controlled Police Force composed of officers from different parts of the country not familiar with the culture, lifestyles and terrain of local communities will have an insurmountable problem of effectively responding to their security needs. The challenges faced by federal security forces in responding to militant activities in the Niger Delta area affords a good illustration of the point been made. The militants’ are able to take advantage of the geographical terrain of the area at the expense of Federal forces. It would take a security outfit of locals familiar with the terrain to effectively respond to the security concerns in that region”.

Much has been written about the propriety of a state controlled police in the peculiar circumstances of Nigeria. Without going into the desirability or otherwise of a state controlled police, it is worthy of note that in federations across the world, state police is a necessary compliment of the federal security apparatus. The United State’s of America is a shining example in this regard. Canada and Australia are two countries where this has also worked. Suffice to point out however, at this stage, a few issues in policing that we as a people should avert our minds to pending the resolution of state controlled police issues one way or another.

The role of the police in a working society and in any modern democracy goes beyond and is much more than that of law enforcement. Police agencies provide a variety of services to the communities they serve, ranging from travelers aid to ambulance service. Indeed, enforcing criminal laws is, at best a part-time activity for most police departments and police officers. The police are the “agency of last resort”. While we must focus upon the law-enforcing duties of police agencies because of our interest in criminal justice, it is also important to note the non enforcement demands placed on the police.

Because police are available 24 hours each day, are mobile and carry authority, we call upon them to resolve many issues and problems. Most of these problems are not, strictly speaking, law enforcement oriented in nature. The principal task of a police agency is best described as “order maintenance”. The peacekeeping function of police is far more important than the law enforcement function. Law enforcement is only a small part of order maintenance.

The criminal law is only one of many tools available to police officers and police agencies in their efforts to keep peace in our communities. The police are responsible for dealing with stray Children and dogs, lost travelers, injured persons, stranded motorists, traffic accidents, parades, domestic disputes and crimes. It seems that almost any disruptive event can be resolved by “calling the cops”. In many cases, people have reported fires to the police first, rather than the fire department. According to many, the police are often called to deal with abandoned cars, but the reason they are called is not because the car may have been involved in a crime. People call the police because the police are the first agency that comes to mind.

People also call the police because they have come to know that the police can (and probably will) do something about the problem. The police have a monopoly on the legitimate use of coercive force. The ability to use force and to make people behave in certain ways defines the police role in society. The police are called to deal with a variety of problems for which force may be required. For example, the police may be called to intervene with a mentally disturbed person because, if all else fails, they can arrest and remove the individual. This action may not cure the mental disorder, but it will solve the immediate problem.

With the crime control mandate came an equally important definition of the police as serving a crime-prevention function. The police were not only expected to detect and apprehend offenders, but police presence on the streets of a city was expected to deter others from committing crime. From this came the tradition of preventive patrol. The uniformed officer on patrol would not only be better able to detect crime, but the patrol presence would prevent crime as well.

The tradition of police as peacekeepers (order maintenance), however, has also remained. While the definition of the police became (and remains) one of a crime-control force, the functions of a modern police department are far broader. The police are the most visible representatives of Government in a community, and they represent the legitimate authority of the law. As they are always (theoretically) present and available, the police have become ombudsmen for all social and legal problems.

Order maintenance is at once both the most important and the most troublesome of police role. Order maintenance is the main purpose of police. If they do nothing else, the police must ensure that the citizens go about their daily business safely and efficiently. Order maintenance activities includes settling disputes, dispersing crowds, keeping sidewalks and streets clear and traffic flowing smoothly, and other important activities.

Law enforcement activities are those that relate directly to the detection and apprehension of criminal offenders. Responding to alarms and citizens complaint of crime, investigating suspicious persons and circumstances, and arresting suspected offenders are all law enforcement activities.

Today however the police role is shaped by a variety of social, political, legal and administrative factors.

The scenario as painted above supposes a modern democracy and a working society. What is the police role here? Do the Nigeria police do any of the things enumerated above? If they do, to what extent have they succeeded or failed? How has the variety of social, political, legal and administrative factors shaped the police role in Nigeria? The Police Act provides that the police shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property and the due enforcement of all laws and regulations with which they are directly charged, and shall perform such military duties within or without Nigeria as may be required by them by, or under the authority of, this or any other Act.

To start with, legally and administratively, the Nigeria police is a highly unified force and is centrally controlled. The Nigeria police have a single command structure with a very powerful police chief, the Inspector General who is accountable and answerable only to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria who appoints him upon the recommendation of the Nigeria Police Council. In the component state’s of the Federation, the Police Commissioners, who are appointed in similar fashion by the Police Service Commission are not accountable to the Governors of the various state’s even though the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, designates State Governors Chief Security Officers of their various states. They are rather subject to the authority of the Inspector General of Police. To make the position of the state Governors more untenable is the fact that when the Governor gives directives to the Commissioner of Police with respect to the maintenance and securing of public safety and public order within the state, the Commissioner of Police may not carry out the lawful order, but request that the matter be referred to the Federal authorities.

This therefore means that a police commissioner can choose what directives to obey or ignore. The discretion is not in any way qualified. So a police commissioner can actually abdicate duty under the guise of consulting with the federal authorities whilst the state where he is expected to maintain law and order and secure lives disintegrate. Recent experience has shown that this is not farfetched. It happened in the days when Chris Uba and his cohorts unleashed mayhem and held Anambra State by the jugular. Revelations at the Justice Kayode Esho led Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Rivers State showed that this may have happened at some point when a community was sacked by armed men in the days of Governor Peter Odili in Portharcourt. So the danger of the misuse of this wide discretion is even now clear and present.

In the same vein, a modern police force may have to grapple and contend with several competing political interests. In much of Africa where the police is centrally organized and controlled, the police and its secret variant have been willing collaborators in any scheme of the ruling power however sinister. The police across Africa during the colonial era was an essential arm of the colonial apparatchik that helped sustained colonial policies and kept the local peoples in check. The dreaded South African secret police helped maintained apartheid and put down rebellion against the evil regime, terrorizing Children and Parents in their homes in the South African townships. The Sharpeville massacre of 1960 and the death of Steve Biko in the custody of the South African police are prime examples. On a grander and unspeakable tragic scale were the dreaded Gestapo and the feared SS in Nazi Germany, the Russian secret police ably aided by the mammoth red army in the days of Communist Russia.

Has Nigeria fared any better? The political situation may never have been anything near what we had in the examples from abroad but the police here have not shown that they will act any differently given the same circumstances. Witness the bestiality and brutality that the police usually unleash during Student protests in time past and during the June 12 struggles. The monumental fraud that was the 2007 elections and the farce in Ekiti State in April 2009 where the police aided and actively colluded with election riggers and ballot box snatchers to truncate the peoples will are recent examples.

The point here is that a centrally controlled police force will more readily lend itself to abuses of this nature. The command structure of such a force is such that once its leadership gets entangled in the political web and intrigues of the ruling party or government as the case may be, then abuse is inevitable. If the police were regionally organized with a loose command structures as should be in a federal state then its susceptibility to abuse or its use for political purposes will be minimized if not eliminated.

Socially, a modern police department should meet the social needs and objectives of the people they police whilst the Government meets the social needs of the police. The quality of Police social interaction with the communities they police invariably manifests in the effectiveness of police work. If the police is distrusted in any community it cannot properly perform its policing functions. The Nigeria police are so distrusted that most people will never genuinely volunteer useful information to them. This in no small measure hampers their crime detection and prevention capacity. Successive police heads recognize the danger this distrust poses to their effectiveness and have taken measures albeit ineffective to correct this and the general impression that in Nigeria, the police is not your friend. There is the ‘police is your friend’ campaign, the police mouth the mantra ‘to protect and serve with integrity’, and there is the police community relations committee yet Nigerians are unimpressed. The police, especially the rank and file are so disreputable in the estimation of Nigerians that it may take another lifetime to whitewash the image of the Nigerian police. It is an irony of sorts that this same odious police at home perform stoutly and are often the toast of peace keeping missions abroad.

A corollary of the pitiable social condition of the police in Nigeria is the poor welfare that obtains. Corruption is rife in the force; the police is ill equipped, poorly paid and ill motivated. The barracks across the length and breath of this country are an eyesore and when any one of them is unfortunate enough to pay the supreme price in the course of duty, he is unsure if his family will be protected and fed. As long as a policeman earns less than N 50, 000. 00 (Fifty Thousand Naira) - which the Nigerian Labour Congress conservatively considers living wage as opposed to laughable minimum wages that successive Governments like to prescribe - per month in Nigeria, then corruption in the force will remain and we will perpetually be ‘a thousand light years’ away from an efficient, effective and effectual police force.


STEPHEN O. OBAJAJA is a Partner at the Lagos Law Firm of Fountain Court Partners.