News

Building a Police Force That Works for All Nigerians, Our Priority — PRS

Published

1 year ago

September 10, 2025

Joel Ajayi

In its commitment to national development and public trust, the Police Reform Secretariat (PRS) is championing efforts to build a modern, inclusive, and accountable police system that truly serves the needs of all Nigerians.

Through stakeholder engagement, institutional reform, and community-focused strategies, the PRS aims to reposition the Nigeria Police Force as a professional and people-centred institution, capable of protecting rights, upholding justice, and fostering nationwide security.

At the heart of this initiative is the Multi-Stakeholder Consultative Forum on National Police Reform, held on Tuesday in Abuja, where key stakeholders from across the country gathered to deliberate on sustainable reforms that can reposition the Nigeria Police Force for national development and improved public trust.

The Police Service Reform (PSR) initiative, spearheaded by the PRS, is a vital and timely effort designed to restructure the Nigeria Police Force into a more professional, accountable, and people-oriented institution. These reforms are anchored on three critical pillars: Professionalism, Accountabilityand People-Oriented Policing.
Also, the forum marks a significant step in the ongoing national dialogue to create a reformed police structure that not only enforces the law but also earns the trust, confidence, and cooperation of the communities it serves.

Speaking at the event, Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, who was represented by AIG M. Gumel, reiterated the importance of inclusive reform. He described the forum as an essential platform to drive meaningful change, saying: “Today’s gathering is not just another meeting. It is a collective call to action. Across Nigeria, communities are demanding a policy and policing system that is inclusive, accountable, professional, and people-centred. We are being asked to imagine — and help build a system that is not merely an institution on paper, but a trusted partner in safeguarding rights and fostering safe, equitable communities.”

He stressed that true reform must be bottom-up, shaped by the diverse voices of Nigerians — from security agencies to civil society, from traditional rulers to youth groups, and from policymakers to everyday citizens.

“As we begin our deliberations today,” he said, “let us be guided by three foundational principles: Inclusivity – Every Nigerian, especially the marginalised, must see themselves in the system that governs them.

Accountability – Policy is a public trust, and transparency must define our actions, Innovation – We must embrace forward-thinking, data-driven approaches that match today’s security realities.”

On behalf of the police and the organising committee, the IGP’s representative declared the forum open, urging all participants to engage in honest, respectful, and action-oriented dialogue.

Speaking during the forum, the Coordinator of the PRS Prof. Olu Ogunsakin, emphasized that the gathering was convened to harness diverse perspectives and collective wisdom to drive meaningful and inclusive reforms.

“This platform allows for open dialogue among stakeholders to shape a reform agenda that reflects the needs of the people and the realities on the ground. We aim to develop a police system that works for all Nigerians.”

In his remarks, the Chairman of the Police Service Commission (PSC), DIG Hashimu Argungu (retd), expressed his gratitude to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the German Government, and other development partners for their unwavering support in shaping a transformative police reform agenda.

“We appreciate our partners for their technical and financial support, and for championing the reform policy review. This effort is about building a police service that is truly in service of the Nigerian people,” DIG Argungu stated.

Delivering a goodwill message, Mr. Christoph Sehotte, representative of the German Embassy, reaffirmed Germany’s commitment to supporting Nigeria’s police reform agenda.
“Police reform is a cornerstone of strong democracy, the rule of law, and public safety. Germany is proud to support this critical process — not only through funding, but through practical and inclusive interventions that deliver real impact,” Sehotte stated.

He highlighted Germany’s efforts in facilitating trainings and workshops to build police capacity, foster gender equality, and promote community policing approaches that bring the police closer to the people and strengthen public trust.

“We are proud of our successful collaboration with implementing partners such as the UNDP, the GS Foundation, and the CLEEN Foundation. Together, we’ve translated our support into concrete actions and visible results on the ground,” he added.

Mr. Sehotte also emphasised the strategic role of the Police Reform Secretariat, describing it as both a coordination hub and a potential think-tank for future policy development.
“Strengthening the Secretariat is essential for the long-term success of police reform in Nigeria. This forum is an important milestone a moment to reflect on progress and shape the next steps toward a modern, accountable, and people-centred police service.”

He concluded by affirming Germany’s long-term commitment to the process and urged all stakeholders — civil society, government, international partners, and communities — to work together to build a police system that serves the people, supports justice, and promotes peace and stability in Nigeria.

Share on Facebook

News

NJC Cannot Dictate Chief Judge Nominee to Imo JSC, Attorney-General Insists

Published

1 day ago

November 6, 2026

The Gleamer

Joel Ajayi

The Imo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Hon. Paul Obinatu has challenged the constitutional authority of the National Judicial Council (NJC) to direct the Imo State Judicial Service Commission (JSC) on the candidate whose name it should submit for consideration in the appointment of a substantive Chief Judge of the state, describing such an intervention as an encroachment on the constitutionally guaranteed independence of the State Commission.

In a statement issued on November 6, 2026, the Attorney-General maintained that the NJC lacks the constitutional authority to dictate, control or substitute its preferred candidate for the independent assessment and recommendation process entrusted to the Imo State JSC under the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The objection follows a directive reportedly issued by the NJC to the Imo State JSC at its 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, concerning the appointment of a substantive Chief Judge for the state.

The Attorney-General argued that the NJC’s constitutional responsibility to recommend a candidate to the Governor does not confer on it the additional power to determine or dictate the candidate the State Judicial Service Commission must submit to it. He maintained that the directive is constitutionally untenable because it interferes with a responsibility expressly vested in the State Judicial Service Commission.

SECTION 202 GUARANTEES IMO JSC’S INDEPENDENCE

Central to the Attorney-General’s objection is Section 202 of the Constitution, which expressly provides that the State Judicial Service Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other authority or person in exercising its constitutionally assigned powers.

He argued that this provision establishes a clear constitutional safeguard against external interference in the Commission’s responsibilities and cannot be overridden by the NJC through administrative directives or procedural guidelines.

According to him, the NJC cannot invoke its national institutional status or its recommendation powers to exercise control over the Imo State JSC in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution.

Consequently, any directive requiring the State JSC to submit a particular candidate or dictating the outcome of its independent assessment would, in the Attorney-General’s interpretation, amount to unconstitutional interference.

CONSTITUTION ASSIGNS DISTINCT RESPONSIBILITIES TO NJC AND STATE JSC

The Attorney-General anchored his position on Section 271(1) and the relevant provisions of the Third Schedule to the Constitution.

Paragraph 6(a) of Part II of the Third Schedule empowers the State Judicial Service Commission to advise the NJC on suitable persons for nomination as Chief Judge of the state.

Conversely, Paragraph 21(c) of Part I of the Third Schedule empowers the NJC to recommend to the Governor, from among the list of persons submitted by the State JSC, a candidate for appointment as Chief Judge.

Section 271(1) further provides that the appointment shall be made by the Governor on the recommendation of the NJC, subject to confirmation by the State House of Assembly.

According to the Attorney-General, these provisions establish a clear constitutional sequence: the State JSC identifies and advises on suitable candidates, the NJC considers the submitted names and makes its recommendation to the Governor, while the Governor exercises the appointing authority subject to legislative confirmation.

He insisted that the NJC’s recommendation powers cannot be interpreted as authority to dictate which candidate the State JSC must select or submit, as doing so would effectively transfer the Commission’s constitutional responsibility to the NJC and render Section 202 meaningless.

NJC GUIDELINES CANNOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION

Addressing the NJC’s Guidelines and Procedural Rules for the Appointment of Judicial Officers, the Attorney-General acknowledged the Council’s authority to prescribe and enforce procedural requirements for judicial appointments.

However, he maintained that such guidelines cannot confer powers beyond those granted by the Constitution or be used to compromise the independent functions of the State JSC.

He stressed that the NJC’s responsibility to ensure compliance with appointment procedures must not be extended to usurping the constitutional authority of the Imo State Judicial Service Commission.

COURT DECISIONS REINFORCE ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S POSITION

In support of his argument, the Attorney-General cited several judicial authorities which he said affirm the importance of constitutional boundaries and institutional independence.

They include Elelu-Habeeb & Anor. v. Attorney-General of the Federation & Ors. (2012) LPELR-15515(SC), Kano State Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption Commission & Anor. v. Salisu & Ors. (2019) LPELR-47107(CA), and Bamisile v. National Judicial Council & Ors. (2012) LPELR-8381(CA).

Other authorities referenced are FRN v. Nganjiwa (2022) LPELR-58066(SC), NJC & Ors. v. Senlong & Ors. (2010) LPELR-4582(CA), and Attorney-General of the Federation v. Attorney-General of Abia State & Ors. (2024) LPELR-62576(SC).

The Attorney-General maintained that these authorities reinforce the principle that every constitutional institution must exercise its powers strictly within the limits prescribed by law, irrespective of its institutional standing.

IMO CHIEF JUDGE APPOINTMENT MUST FOLLOW CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURE

The Attorney-General warned that allowing the NJC to assume functions constitutionally assigned to the State JSC would undermine the integrity of the judicial appointment process and compromise the independence of the Commission.

He maintained that the issue is not a contest for institutional superiority between the NJC and the State JSC, but the need for each institution to respect the constitutional boundaries of its authority.

He further emphasised that the NJC’s responsibility to recommend a candidate to the Governor must not be confused with the power to control the independent selection and submission process of the State Commission.

The Attorney-General insisted that the ongoing appointment process must be conducted strictly in accordance with the Constitution, without interference that could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.

For the Imo State Attorney-General, the constitutional position is clear: while the NJC has the responsibility to recommend a candidate to the Governor, it has no authority to dictate to the Imo State Judicial Service Commission the candidate whose name it must submit in the exercise of its independent constitutional mandate.

Share on Facebook