The Movement for Improved Welfare for Nigeria Police Force (MIWNPF) has called on President Bola Tinubu to withhold assent to the controversial State Police Bill, alleging that the National Assembly passed the proposed legislation without public debate, stakeholder engagement, or input from leading civil society organisations that have long championed police reform and citizens’ security in Nigeria.

In a press statement dated August 4, 2026, and signed by its National Coordinator, Toyin Raheem Prince, the group described the process leading to the passage of the bill as “an affront to over 200 million Nigerians,” insisting that a law with far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s security architecture should not have been enacted without extensive public participation.

According to MIWNPF, the proposed legislation is expected to be transmitted to President Tinubu for presidential assent, but the organisation urged the President to reject the bill until Nigerians and relevant stakeholders are given an opportunity to debate its provisions.

The statement read, “The Movement for Improved Welfare for Nigeria Police Force (MIWNPF) is aware that a bill for the creation of state police is about to be transmitted to Mr President by the National Assembly.

“We are alarmed that this Bill was processed with no public debate, no stakeholder engagement, and no input from the very organisations that have spent years working on police reform and citizens’ security in Nigeria.”

The organisation said it was excluded from the legislative process alongside several prominent civil society groups actively involved in security sector reforms.

Among the organisations listed were the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAC), Network on Police Reform in Nigeria (NOPRIN), CLEEN Foundation, Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), Campaign for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (CCHR), Centre for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), Centre for People’s Defence (CPD), Campaign for Democracy and Justice (CDJ), United Action for Democracy (UAD), Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR), Coalition Against Corruption and Bad Governance (CACOBAG), Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), Nigeria Democratic Security Coalition (CNDSRC), and several others.

The group questioned why such organisations were not invited to make submissions before lawmakers.

“No public hearing was called. How can a law that will affect the security architecture of over 200 million Nigerians be passed in this manner?” the group asked.

MIWNPF argued that Nigeria is currently not prepared for the establishment of state police, warning that the proposed structure could easily be abused by state governors for political purposes.

It stated that, given Nigeria’s current political environment, state police could become instruments for intimidating opposition figures, manipulating elections, and settling political disputes.

“Risk of Political Misuse. In our current political climate, state police will become a tool in the hands of sitting governors to intimidate opponents, rig elections, and settle political scores. We have already seen the misuse of existing state-backed security outfits,” the organisation stated.

The group also warned that introducing another policing structure would worsen confusion within Nigeria’s already fragmented internal security framework.

It noted that various regional and state-backed security outfits already exist across the country, including the Western Nigeria Security Network (Amotekun) in the South-West, the Oodua People’s Congress (OPC), Hisbah religious police operating in Kano, Jigawa, Katsina, Zamfara and other northern states, the Ebubeagu Security Network in the South-East, as well as numerous community policing and vigilante groups.

According to the organisation, creating state police without first reforming and harmonising these existing structures would breed rivalry, duplication of responsibilities, and abuse of power.

The group also questioned the practical relevance of establishing state police when each state already has a Commissioner of Police appointed to oversee federal policing operations.

“Today, every state has a Commissioner of Police (CP) as the head of the federal police in the state. If we now create ‘State Police’ with a different head by another name, what changes? The structure remains the same, but accountability becomes weaker. Is that true federalism?” MIWNPF queried.

Drawing comparisons with other countries, MIWNPF argued that successful state policing systems operate within nations that possess stronger democratic institutions, independent judicial systems, autonomous local governments, and adequate funding.

The organisation cited the United States and Germany as examples of countries where decentralised policing works because institutional safeguards are firmly established.

Meanwhile, it pointed to Ghana, Rwanda and Kenya, where largely centralised policing systems have recorded significant reform successes.

According to the group, Nigeria’s policing crisis stems not from centralisation but from chronic underfunding, poor welfare, inadequate equipment, weak accountability mechanisms, and political interference.

Rather than creating state police, MIWNPF called for comprehensive reforms of the Nigeria Police Force, including increased funding, procurement of modern operational equipment such as patrol vehicles, forensic laboratories, body cameras and ICT infrastructure.

The group also demanded improved life assurance, health insurance, pensions, welfare packages, training programmes, psychological support for officers, merit-based postings, and an end to political interference in policing.

“Until these are fixed, creating state police is putting the cart before the horse,” the organisation said.

MIWNPF further criticised the manner in which the National Assembly handled the legislation, alleging that Nigerians no longer have confidence in the parliament led by Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

The group accused lawmakers of imposing the legislation without democratic consultation.

“The National Assembly cannot pass a Bill of this magnitude without hearing Nigerians. The Senate where ‘ayes have it’ even when the ‘nay’ was as loud as thunder, and the ‘aye’ as faint as a whisper in a crowded market. That is not democracy. That is imposition,” they said.

It added that true federalism should not be equated with the creation of separate state police forces, arguing instead that genuine federalism requires devolution of powers accompanied by responsibility, financial autonomy, and effective oversight mechanisms.

The organisation therefore made three demands.

It urged President Tinubu to withhold assent to the State Police Bill.

The organisation called on the National Assembly to organise a national public debate or town hall meeting on policing in Nigeria, with MIWNPF and all listed civil society organisations invited to participate.

MIWNPF urged the Federal Government to prioritise full implementation of the Nigeria Police Act 2020 by adequately funding and equipping the Nigeria Police Force, improving officers’ welfare, and carrying out comprehensive police reforms before considering any restructuring of the country’s policing system.

“Nigeria deserves security that protects the people, not security that protects politicians,” they added.

Nigeria’s Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Olatunji Disu has called on officers of the police force to embrace the proposed creation of state police, saying the Federal Government led by President Bola Tinubu has made up its mind to establish the new policing structure and that the Force must play a leading role in educating personnel about the reform.

Declaring open a one-day workshop on state policing, the IGP described the proposed initiative as one of the most significant security reforms currently under consideration in Nigeria, noting that its outcome would have implications beyond the country’s borders.

“This is a very important topic raging in the country today and in other parts of the world because everything that happens in Nigeria concerns the world,” Disu said.

He explained that discussions on state police have advanced through several stages, including the establishment of committees, constitutional amendment deliberations and the development of an implementation framework.

According to him, the immediate responsibility of the police leadership is to ensure that officers fully understand the concept and objectives of state policing.

“We are leading hundreds of officers who must be told about state police, who must be educated about state police to allay their fears because there are fears everywhere, and it’s our duty to educate them and let them know what state police is all about,” he said.

Disu stressed that the proposed reform should not be viewed as a project of the Nigeria Police Force alone but as a national initiative being driven by the Federal Government in the interest of Nigerians.

“The Federal Government of Nigeria have made up their mind to have the state police, and it’s our duty to assist them to achieve it,” he said.

He added, “This is not the issue of us only. This is the issue of the Federal Government of Nigeria and the people of Nigeria.”

The Inspector-General urged participants at the workshop to actively engage in discussions and seek clarification on areas of concern so they would be equipped to enlighten officers in their respective commands.

“So the most important thing is to listen very well, ask questions, how this thing is going to work, so that we’ll be able to go back and talk to our officers and educate them,” he said.

Disu commended Professor Olu Ogunsakin, Director General, National Institute of Police Studies and Head, Nigeria Police Reform Secretariat, for his contributions to the development of the framework on state policing, describing him as a key resource person in the ongoing reform process.

The IGP recalled that although there were initial suggestions that the police should remain passive because decisions on state policing had already been taken, the Force instead opted to establish its own committee to contribute meaningfully to the national conversation.

“I’ll go back to when we were about to start. Arguments arose that decisions have been taken and we should just sit down and be complacent and not do anything about it. I’m happy we quickly agreed to set up a committee,” he stated.

He disclosed that although the Nigeria Governors’ Forum had already constituted its committee and made significant progress, the police committee worked swiftly to catch up.

“The governors have already set up their committee. They have already almost concluded, in fact, they have concluded. We started late, we caught up with them, and I’m happy to say our work is what they are deliberating on today,” Disu said.

According to him, the police committee produced the framework within just 17 days, laying the foundation for the ongoing national discussions.

“I think it took us 17 days only to come up with the framework that has become the genesis of what everybody is working on today,” he said.

Disu, however, noted that the framework remains a work in progress and would continue to benefit from expert input before its final adoption.

“We still need to put some finishing touches to it,” he said.

He further disclosed that retired Inspectors-General of Police had met with him to offer recommendations aimed at strengthening the proposed framework.

“Retired Inspectors-General of Police have visited me, and they have shown their concern, and we have deliberated, and they have put in their contributions into this as well,” he said.

The IGP encouraged participants to critically examine the framework and make further contributions to ensure that all important issues are adequately addressed.

“You have the opportunity to help us to look at it so that every detail, every important detail that will be needed, should be input into it,” he added.

Disu also revealed that the committee carried out comparative studies of policing systems in other federal countries to guide Nigeria’s approach.

“A lot of comparative analysis have been done. We have taken time to study nations where they have state police: India, America, and even Pakistan, how things work there,” he said.

He concluded by urging participants to approach the workshop with seriousness, saying their contributions would help shape the future of policing in Nigeria.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has insisted that its temporary restriction on an Osun State Government bank account was lawful and backed by provisions of the EFCC Act and the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.

Speaking on Arise Television on Thursday, EFCC spokesperson and Director of Public Affairs, Wilson Uwujaren, rejected claims by the Osun State Government and the Nigerian Bar Association that the commission required a court order before placing the restriction.

According to him, the decision followed what the agency described as suspicious transactions on the account over the past week.

“As we indicated in the statement released by the Commission, we took that step to preserve the account of the Osun State Government.

“We observed in the past one week that activities on that account looked suspicious, and based on the mandate of the Commission, we took the step of placing a restriction on that account to preserve it,” he said.

Uwujaren clarified that the action affected only one account and did not amount to a freeze on all Osun State accounts.

“That restriction order does not mean that all the accounts of Osun State have been frozen. No. It is just a targeted restriction on one account of the Osun State Government,” he said.

He explained that the commission noticed multiple transfers from the account to several corporate entities within a short period, prompting the intervention.

“The essence, like I said, is just to preserve that account because we observed suspicious activities on that account in terms of the transfer of funds to a number of entities within one week.

“So we had to take that decision to place a restriction on that account, not minding the fact that there is an election process in place,” he said.

The EFCC spokesman argued that the agency would have been criticised if it had failed to act while public funds were allegedly being moved.

“We have the responsibility under the law to do so because if we don’t take that step and, for instance, funds are looted from the account of the Osun State Government, I’m sure the Nigerian public will also ask, ‘Where was the EFCC when those funds were being moved?’” he said.

Uwujaren maintained that the state government still had access to other accounts and could continue to carry out its operations, including salary payments.

“It does not stop the Osun State Government from running the government of the state because they have access to other funds in the other accounts that they have.

“In any case, the payment of salaries and other expenditures by the state government happens just once in a month. What we have done is not a blanket freezing of the account.

“It’s just a targeted freezing. Once we are satisfied that activities on that account are no longer suspicious, it will be lifted,” he said.

On the legal basis for the restriction, he pointed to specific statutory provisions empowering the commission to temporarily restrict access to an account.

“A number of people have asked whether the Commission has the power to do so under the law. I can assure you that we have the power to place a temporary restriction on an account.

“Section 34 of the EFCC Act and Section 7, Subsection 6 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2022 give us that authority to take that step,” he said.

He added that the restriction could remain in place for up to 72 hours before the commission would need to seek judicial backing if it wished to extend it.

“The restriction order can last within 72 hours before we can come with a court order if we need to provide a court order,” he said.