The Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice in Lagos State, Lawal Pedro, has thrown his weight behind the growing call for the establishment of state police across Nigeria, arguing that the current centralised structure of the Nigeria Police Force is no longer effective in addressing the country’s worsening security challenges.
Speaking amid renewed national debate on security reform, the Lagos chief law officer maintained that Nigeria’s federal policing arrangement is overstretched and unable to respond swiftly and efficiently to localised criminal threats. According to him, crimes such as kidnapping, armed robbery, banditry, cult violence, and communal clashes often occur within specific communities and require tailored responses rooted in local intelligence and familiarity with the terrain.
He explained that policing a complex and diverse country like Nigeria from a single central command structure creates operational gaps. With 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory relying on a federally controlled police institution, response times can be slow, and officers may lack adequate knowledge of the communities they serve. Pedro argued that decentralising policing powers would allow states to take greater responsibility for internal security and complement federal efforts.
The Lagos Attorney-General’s position aligns with President Bola Tinubu’s longstanding advocacy for state police as part of broader constitutional reforms. Supporters of the proposal believe decentralisation would strengthen grassroots security, enhance intelligence gathering, and foster closer relationships between law enforcement and local communities.
Pedro stressed that Nigeria’s security landscape has evolved significantly over the years, with increasing urbanisation, technological advancement, and complex criminal networks demanding more dynamic responses. He suggested that relying solely on a centralised police force designed decades ago is no longer sufficient to guarantee public safety in modern times.
However, he acknowledged the concerns of critics who fear that state police could be manipulated by governors to intimidate political opponents or suppress dissent. In response to such fears, Pedro emphasised the need for strong constitutional safeguards and oversight mechanisms. He proposed that any framework establishing state police should clearly define operational boundaries and accountability structures to prevent abuse of power.
One of the suggestions highlighted involves transferring policing from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent Legislative List in Nigeria’s Constitution. This change would allow both federal and state governments to legislate on policing matters, creating a dual system where federal and state forces operate under harmonised national standards.
Pedro also recommended strengthening oversight institutions such as police service commissions to regulate recruitment, discipline, and promotions. Such bodies, he argued, would ensure professionalism and maintain uniform standards across all policing levels, reducing the risk of politicisation.
The debate over state police is not new in Nigeria. Since the return to democratic governance in 1999, successive administrations and lawmakers have periodically revisited the issue, especially during periods of heightened insecurity. Proponents often point to Nigeria’s First Republic, when regional policing structures existed, as evidence that decentralised policing is not alien to the country’s constitutional history.
Supporters believe that state police would improve rapid response capabilities and allow governors who are constitutionally designated as chief security officers of their states to exercise more direct control over security operations. They argue that such reforms would enhance accountability, as citizens could hold their state governments directly responsible for maintaining law and order.
On the other hand, opponents caution that Nigeria’s political environment could make state-controlled police forces vulnerable to misuse. Concerns also exist about whether all states have the financial capacity to adequately fund, equip, and sustain independent police institutions without compromising standards.
Despite the divergent views, the Lagos Attorney-General maintained that the shortcomings of the current system are too significant to ignore. He argued that meaningful reform is necessary if Nigeria is to effectively confront persistent threats to peace and stability. According to him, decentralisation does not mean dismantling the federal police but rather strengthening security architecture through collaboration and shared responsibility.
As conversations continue within the National Assembly and among stakeholders nationwide, the proposal for state police remains one of the most consequential constitutional reform discussions in recent years.
Whether lawmakers will secure the required constitutional amendments remains uncertain, but the backing of key state officials such as the Lagos Attorney-General adds considerable momentum to the movement.
Ultimately, the outcome of this debate could reshape Nigeria’s approach to law enforcement and internal security. For many citizens who experience insecurity firsthand, the hope is that any reform, whether through state police or improved federal structures will result in safer communities and a more responsive policing system.
