Has the Senate gone on a cutting spree? cut this, cut that, limit presidential powers, limited the powers of state govt to sack lg chairmen they will address pressing issues, is to be putting limits here and there. useless polithiefians

Yossarian:


This is a very common misapprehension. There is very little wrong with the Constitution; there is everything wrong with the people in government. I challenge you to present a clause in our Constitution that an honest man cannot put to good use.

Indeed the Nigerian situation is due entirely to the lawlessness of leaders, in that they think and conduct themselves as if they're above all our laws, including the Constitution.

It is only recently, since 2003 or so, that laws were made for no other purpose than the gratification of the political class. Most, if not all, of our laws made before then had sound practical applications, especially as those laws were borrowed wholesale from the countries of this world that take laws seriously.
Bros, I beg to differ, Nigerian constitutions is as confusing as the country itself.

Nigeria is a victim of its leaders, not its laws.

Bro, I beg to differ, the constitution is as confusing as the country.... the genetic make-up is brain sapping.

One of the reason this move is laudable is to checkmate marauding herdsmen menace. At least, the State Governor will have the resources to counter terrorist activities within his boundary.

omohayek:


While I generally agree with the drift of your proposals, I don't think it's right to say that community policing "should be totally out of political influence"; how then would the police be held accountable?

I think a better proposal would be for policing to operate at a truly community level, i.e. at the LGA, or the city ward. Police commissioners should be electable officials directly accountable to the ward or LGA in which they are elected, and not subject to any direct influence by governors. A police commissioner who loses the trust of his or her fellow community members would then be sure that he or she would be out of a job come the next election; this would radically reorient our policemen from shaking down innocent people for bribes to actually doing something meaningful about fighting crime.

Of course, for the sort of community policing I'm suggesting to work, the LGAs must first be freed from the control of the state governors.

I don't think my opinion is "right" and I would not say yours is wrong it is just that; an opinion. That is the function of the word "should" as opposed to shall or must
What I meant by out of political influence is the operational side of policing i.e deciding who gets ,investigated ,arrested or not investigated arrested and when,essentially operational decisions of the police. That is what that paragraph was about; operations
I cannot see any justification for governors to have operational roles in community policing.
To my mind that should be out of political influence. How do we hold judges,legislators to account
There may be a political role for pardon,amnesties and such like but that is not policing.Another political model would be where the police chief is elected by the policed and therefore is a political job as is the case in the UK since 206


I think it is for the policed to determine what is good for them. The nature of policing is not static so what may be good in 2016 may not be in 2020 .So policing will evolve and change and there is no model for all times

omonnakoda:

Nice points , though not sure if expletives makes them more meaningful.

The police resources consumed varies from state to state and probably will change with time.
If states have to pay for police then the Police budget will have to be redistributed and the formula for redistribution will be very controversial. This will expose the fact that some states get more unaccounted resources from the Centre whether it be policing, maintaining prison population etc. I believe there is more policing spend in Lagos that Ekiti and ditto for inmates in Federal prisons. State would have to start paying for this

There is also the added risk that police resources once reallocated from the centre may be "reprioritized" to other things.

The issue requires a lot more debate and inquiry into practice from around the world.

My view is the police should be truly independent operationally both from the president and from the governors with greater input from the Judiciary.
There are two types of policing I would argue; Those involved in community policing generally and those involving breakdown of law and order . The former should be totally out of political influence and the latter which is more complex would require more thought

Pardon the language, I just get exasperated over the kind of things the Nigerian leadership comes up with sometimes. But you see, that's why I said this unitary system of states/regions feeding off or being funded by the centre needs to be jettisoned and let them do the work while the FG concerns itself with external/international relations primarily. If that is the case, the question of re-allocation of funds for the police will be dealt with because the recruiting regions generate their funds and will recruit on the basis of their needs balanced against the availability of funds. Any state that gains unduly from the current practice will have itself to blame and contend with, it will not be the concern of others. When the reality dawns that no one is allocating any funds for internal police within a state/region, they will set their priorities right and know that those employed or recruited must be paid.

There will definitely be a classification of offences more in line with dangerous crimes like fraud, terrorism inter-state crimes and so which will be the primary responsibility of the federal police to attend to while internal community policing of state offences like theft, rape, murder, traffic offences and maintaining general law and order, etc will be dealt with by the internal/state police. The FG will of course pay those.

omonnakoda:
I don't think my opinion is "right" and I would not say yours is wrong it is just that; an opinion. That is the function of the word "should" as opposed to shall or must
What I meant by out of political influence is the operational side of policing i.e deciding who gets ,investigated ,arrested or not investigated arrested and when,essentially operational decisions of the police. That is what that paragraph was about; operations
I cannot see any justification for governors to have operational roles in community policing.
To my mind that should be out of political influence. How do we hold judges,legislators to account
There may be a political role for pardon,amnesties and such like but that is not policing.Another political model would be where the police chief is elected by the policed and therefore is a political job as is the case in the UK since 206

I think it is for the policed to determine what is good for them. The nature of policing is not static so what may be good in 2016 may not be in 2020 .So policing will evolve and change and there is no model for all times

I quite agree with having an elected police chief at state levels and that brings the citizens more in tune and contact with the members of the police as far as security issues are concerned.

As usual, busy looking for electioneering structure while governance is relegated, when will the constitution be amended to strip governors of LG funds?

freeze001:


Pardon the language, I just get exasperated over the kind of things the Nigerian leadership comes up with sometimes. But you see, that's why I said this unitary system of states/regions feeding off or being funded by the centre needs to be jettisoned and let them do the work while the FG concerns itself with external/international relations primarily. If that is the case, the question of re-allocation of funds for the police will be dealt with because the recruiting regions generate their funds and will recruit on the basis of their needs balanced against the availability of funds. Any state that gains unduly from the current practice will have itself to blame and contend with, it will not be the concern of others. When the reality dawns that no one is allocating any funds for internal police within a state/region, they will set their priorities right and know that those employed or recruited must be paid.

There will definitely be a classification of offences more in line with dangerous crimes like fraud, terrorism inter-state crimes and so which will be the primary responsibility of the federal police to attend to while internal community policing of state offences like theft, rape, murder, traffic offences and maintaining general law and order, etc will be dealt with by the internal/state police. The FG will of course pay those.

Clearly you are very thoughtful and have considered the issues in much detail. There is still quite a lot of debating ahead
It is very difficult to leave states to their own devices if they fail to adequately manage or fund security. The problem will eventually spread and involve the whole country whether it be kidnapping or drug dealing and so on. A proliferation of agencies like NDLEA is not necessarily a solution either. Perhaps a hybrid of a federal and regional policing rather than state level arrangements would be better. I do not think we have the capacity to effectively check and balance State Governors who are given operational control of the police. Even then we have on record the case of a governor who took a citizen to government house to be flogged for "disrespectful" behaviour.
I would argue for a more effective police commission at regional level with Members who are elected as well as senior citizens e.g retired judges/respected statesmen and possibly traditional rulers and representatives of stakeholder bodies e.g markets and Housing associations/estates. I would have no problem with political appointees /commissioner being chosen by governors but once in office being accountable to the legislature or Judiciary and so they cannot be sacked by governors just as is the case with judges.

There are a significant number of states that have very little capacity or desire to do anything for themselves. Abandoning them to their fate won't work because they can still easily export their uneducated, unwashed or criminal elements anywhere in the federation. There is a link between education,unemployment and crime and dealing with them must involve coordinated national strategy.
Unfortunately any unbalanced resource allocation in our circumstances generates a lot of heat and controversy

omonnakoda:

Clearly you are very thoughtful and have considered the issues in much detail. There is still quite a lot of debating ahead
It is very difficult to leave states to their own devices if they fail to adequately manage or fund security. The problem will eventually spread and involve the whole country whether it be kidnapping or drug dealing and so on. A proliferation of agencies like NDLEA is not necessarily a solution either. Perhaps a hybrid of a federal and regional policing rather than state level arrangements would be better. I do not think we have the capacity to effectively check and balance State Governors who are given operational control of the police. Even then we have on record the case of a governor who took a citizen to government house to be flogged for "disrespectful" behaviour.
I would argue for a more effective police commission at regional level with Members who are elected as well as senior citizens e.g retired judges/respected statesmen and possibly traditional rulers and representatives of stakeholder bodies e.g markets and Housing associations/estates. I would have no problem with political appointees /commissioner being chosen by governors but once in office being accountable to the legislature or Judiciary and so they cannot be sacked by governors just as is the case with judges.

There are a significant number of states that have very little capacity or desire to do anything for themselves. Abandoning them to their fate won't work because they can still easily export their uneducated, unwashed or criminal elements anywhere in the federation. There is a link between education,unemployment and crime and dealing with them must involve coordinated national strategy.
Unfortunately any unbalanced resource allocation in our circumstances generates a lot of heat and controversy

I agree and favour a regional approach rather than states because that collective sense of responsibility will engender reasonable accountability and water down any unnecessary excesses by state governors as currently constituted. It is also true that a good number of states have no business being states but were created to just siphon more money from the centre because they are nonviable and the governors are chronic ignorant oafs so the regional support would be necessary to carry their dead weight. At least they would need to be accountable and contribute to their collective regional pot to eat out of it.

freeze001:
All this knee-jerk amendments are just scratching the surface. The FG has too much unnecessary power and responsibilities. They need to go to the root of the problem and fůckïng let the regions/states work! How do State governors effectively order the police as final authority when the FG recruits and pays their salaries?

If a Governor gives orders which the FG doesn't like what stops recession from suddenly affecting police salaries n allowances? Why won't there suddenly be a flurry of recalls and postings for 'more effective policing'? It is time for the federating units to mature from breastfeeding to actually earnings and paying dues to the 'federal parents' for maintenance! There should be regional police from which specific numbers are uniformly drawn and drafted into a federal police for federal and inter-state offences. These ones will then be paid by the FG. The regions/states ought to do their recruitment according to their size, needs and income and not this federal policing system that is a complete drag.

For those saying Governors will hijack n misuse police, has the FG not been doing the same thing? Is it not any party a president belongs to that enjoys police patronage except Jonathan that to some extent gave free rein to other political parties? So what is so wonderful about 'federal oppression' that cannot be dealt with at regional/state level? There must be provisions in place to address those fears and arrest the hypocrisy/blackmail against regional/state police!

Myopic analysis, do you know how much it cost to maintain an arm of any force?
where will the states get such funds from?

You recruit them, pay them, house them and after a period, they are pensionable for life, which state can afford such in our current Nigeria?

The state of Newyork can afford an NYPD because the budget of Newyork is bigger than Nigeria's at large.
furthermore, there is still the FBI that has jurisdiction cover over the NYPD so what is the point having a state police with our meager resources?

The law is useless if the states can not pay the CP and his boys, except you want police turned armed robbers everywhere.
A black man is too myopic because right now, people are seeing just elections without analysing the bigger picture.

The states are better off with Vigilante licensed by the feds.

CFCman:
This proposal should definitely come with strong checks and balances to prevent Governors from abusing the law. I'm afraid the governors could essentially turn the state police commands into their own private armies; gubernatorial opponents could be arrested on the flimsy orders of an incumbent governor.

I'd limit the powers of the governor ove the police to convening security meetings with the Commissioner of Police, DCPs and ACPs, and reshuffling police officers to areas where policing is inadequate. The governor shall have NO power to order the arrest of an individual or individuals.

Furthermore, I also believe the appointment of the Inspector General of Police (and Deputy Inspectors General of Police) should be subject to the advice and consent (confirmation) of the Senate. This would ensure that the IGP and the DIG's aren't simply lapdogs of Aso Rock. Senate confirmation should also be required for the appointment of the heads of the Nigeria Customs Service, Nigeria Prisons Service, Nigeria Immigration Service, DSS, FRSC, NIA, and DIA.

Also, the Commissioners of Police (or DCPs, if the CPs aren't available) should be required to brief members of the state houses of assembly on a quarterly basis, on the general security condition of the respective states.

I support all the check and balances you have suggested so far. But what I would like to see being done, is making the police completely independent or at least, subject only to legislative control.

Again, I would also want the Senate to look into the issue of the immunity clause as enshrined in the constitution. The essence of the clause for maintaining the smooth running of government has been completely defeated, as most members of the executive have turned it to an avenue of siphoning state funds and abusing governmental powers and processes while in office.

Thus, the change should read as follow:

" where there is a case of financial misconduct, fiscal irresponsibility and murder, the immunity clause shall not count."

This would further give powers to the police and the relevant authorities such as the EFCC to adequately tackle the issue of executive financial recklessness and criminality.


Notwithstanding, what the senate is current doing relating to the police, is a step in the right direction.

Exercise in futility. A bill cannot wrest control of the police from the FG and hence the president, to do that will require constitutional amendment. The president as the commander in chief of the armed forces has control over all the armed forces, including the police.

While some people are busy shouting Tinubu, Saraki has rendered Buhari impotent. Saraki has reduced Buhari to a lame duck President.

States with diff political terrain?


Why can they just make them answerable to the attorney general or the CJN?


This idea looks good cos I like the reduced effect from also rock, but this would make the military to be back and we'll have a clash of forces.

Under my model of devolution of police powers to the states:

- The federal govt will still be responsible for the salaries, wages and emoluments of police officers

- The state governors (as has been the practice for sometime) would be partially responsible for equipping the state police formations, subject to an Appropriations Act of the House of Assembly

- The President and governors will be stripped of powers to order the arrest of individuals. That power will rest on the DPOs, CPs, AIGs, DIGs, and IG, after thorough investigation by police detectives (officers).

wirinet:
Exercise in futility. A bill cannot wrest control of the police from the FG and hence the president, to do that will require constitutional amendment. The president as the commander in chief of the armed forces has control over all the armed forces, including the police.

This bill is part of the proposed constitutional amendment bills.
If Buhari vetoes the bill (provided that it is approved by at least 24 state houses of assembly), the NASS could override the presidential veto with 2/3 of its members voting to do so.

Appleyard:


I support all the check and balances you have suggested so far. But what I would like to see being done, is making the police completely independent or at least, subject only to legislative control.

Again, I would also want the Senate to look into the issue of the immunity clause as enshrined in the constitution. The essence of the clause for maintaining the smooth running of government has been completely defeated, as most members of the executive have turned it to an avenue of siphoning state funds and abusing governmental powers and processes while in office.

Thus, the change should read as follow:

" where there is a case of financial misconduct, fiscal irresponsibility and murder, the immunity clause shall not count."

This would further give powers to the police and the relevant authorities such as the EFCC to adequately tackle the issue of executive financial recklessness and criminality.


Notwithstanding, what the senate is current doing relating to the police, is a step in the right direction.

I also agree with your ideas.

The Senate could appoint an IG upon the nomination of such an officer by the Police Service Commission; or appoint the most senior DIG to the position.

The mode of appointing the IG, and the heads of other statutory law enforcement agencies, would be by way of a vote of all Senators. An IG-nominee shall only assume the position by a 9/10 vote (98 senators) of all Senators. This ensures that the IG won't simply be a puppet of the party in the majority.

And lastly, police funding (at the federal level) shall be first line charge. Again, this would further insulate the police and other law enforcement agencies from political influence.

Everblazinggg:




Except who? Are you from Gambia or Liberia? Or you have low and fadeing memory or you decided to ignore the fact that GEJ used the police to intimidate people he didn't agree with. You remember when he used police to attack newspaper editors? Remember when he used dss to attack APC headquarters or when he used CP mbu to fight amaechi or when he gave cover to rivers state house of assembly 5 against 19 others? Or should I continue?

Thank you for saying it loud and clear to that guy. Only a person with 2mb of brain memory would forget how PDP used Marilyn Oga to raid APC office claiming cloning of PVCs,how many persons did they charge to court?Or seizure of newspapers before they later compensated the editors? Or the withdrawal of Tambuwal after defecting from PDP?Or Mbu and Amaechi drama?

mayorchelsea:
Thank you for saying it loud and clear to that nigga with a short memory?Only a person with 2mb of brain memory would forget how PDP used Marilyn Oga to raid APC office claiming cloning of PVCs,how many persons did they charge to court?Or seizure of newspapers before they later compensated the editors? Or the withdrawal of Tambuwal after defecting from PDP?Or Mbu and Amaechi drama?

Do not mind PDP and its allies ( IPOB, NDA, etc), when Jonathan was using police to intimidate Governors that disagreed with him, intimidating the national assembly by locking up the gates of the national assembly complex, rigging elections in ekiti, they were cheerleading then. Now that what goes around has come around, they are screaming blue murder. Policing and security us an executive function in a democracy, it can never be handed over to the legislature.