By Okechukwu Nwanguma*
*Introduction*
The enactment of the Nigeria Police Act 2020 marked a historic milestone in Nigeria’s effort to reform its policing system.
The Act replaced the colonial Police Act of 1943, which had governed the Nigeria Police for over seven decades. For the first time, Nigeria adopted a modern legislative framework aimed at aligning policing with democratic standards, accountability, and the rule of law.
One of the most significant reforms introduced by the 2020 Act was the provision of a single four-year tenure for the Inspector-General of Police (IGP). This provision was designed to address the long-standing problem of leadership instability and to enable strategic planning, policy continuity, and sustained reform within the Nigeria Police Force.
However, recent legislative and executive actions – particularly the rushed amendment of the Police Act in 2024 to extend the tenure of the then Inspector-General – have generated serious legal, institutional, and democratic concerns. These developments raise fundamental questions about the integrity of Nigeria’s police reform process.
*The Original Intention of the Four-Year Tenure*
The four-year tenure provision under the Nigeria Police Act 2020 was carefully conceived to correct a structural defect in the previous legal regime.
Under the repealed Police Act of 1943, the Inspector-General of Police had no guaranteed tenure. Appointments and removals were at the discretion of the President, and tenure was often tied to retirement timelines under public service rules. This created uncertainty, discouraged long-term planning, and undermined reform efforts.
As a member of the expert review process that contributed to the development of the 2020 Act – through engagements between the National Assembly and the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC) – I can state that the intention behind the four-year tenure provision was unambiguous.
The expectation was that any officer appointed as IGP should have sufficient years remaining in service to complete a full four-year term. This position was publicly affirmed at the time by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Police.
Crucially, the provision was never intended to override the Public Service Rules, which require retirement after 35 years of service or upon attaining the age of 60 years. Rather, it imposed a responsibility on the appointing authority to select a candidate whose service timeline aligns with the tenure requirement.
*The 2024 Amendment and Its Controversies*
The amendment of the Police Act in 2024 significantly altered this framework and has sparked widespread concern.
The amendment, introduced through an executive bill, provides that a person appointed as Inspector-General of Police shall remain in office for four years from the date specified in the letter of appointment.
The manner in which this amendment was passed raises serious issues. The bill went through first, second, and third readings in a single legislative sitting, without the benefit of a public hearing or stakeholder consultation. This process falls short of established democratic standards for law-making, which emphasise transparency, deliberation, and public participation.
More importantly, the amendment appeared tailored to extend the tenure of the then Inspector-General, who had reached the statutory retirement age. This creates a direct conflict between the Police Act and the Public Service Rules, thereby introducing legal ambiguity into the governance of the Nigerian Police.
*Institutional Consequences of Tenure Manipulation*
Beyond the legal controversy, the amendment has profound institutional implications.
A particularly troubling issue is the entrenched practice of forcing senior officers into retirement when a junior officer is appointed as IGP. Although widely practised, this convention has no basis in law.
The consequences are severe:
– Loss of experienced leadership and institutional memory
– Disruption of career progression
– Declining morale within the force
– Perception of arbitrariness and injustice in personnel management
This practice has now been judicially challenged. In Moses Ambakina Jitoboh v. Police Service Commission, the National Industrial Court held that the compulsory retirement of senior officers on the basis of junior appointments is unlawful. The court affirmed that retirement must strictly comply with statutory provisions – namely, 35 years of service or attainment of 60 years of age.
This judgment directly undermines a long-standing but legally indefensible institutional culture within the Nigerian Police.
*The Wider Problem: Politicisation of Police Leadership*
The controversy over the tenure of the Inspector-General reflects a deeper structural issue – the politicisation of police leadership in Nigeria.
Successive administrations have treated the office of the IGP as a political appointment rather than a professional leadership position within a critical national institution.
Both under former President Muhammadu Buhari and the current administration, there have been concerns about non-compliance with the consultative role of the Nigeria Police Council, as provided for in law. In practice, the President often makes the selection, while the Council merely formalises the decision.
This undermines institutional safeguards designed to ensure transparency, professionalism, and merit in the appointment process.
*The Debate on Extending Retirement Age and Service Years*
The proposal to increase the retirement age of police officers from 60 to 65 years and years of service from 35 to 40 raises further policy concerns.
While proponents argue that such changes would retain experienced officers, this position is not supported by empirical evidence. Professional competence in policing depends less on years of service and more on training, continuous re-skilling, and exposure to modern policing methods.
Policing is also a physically and mentally demanding profession. Extending service years without addressing underlying issues – such as welfare, training, and working conditions – risks compounding existing problems.
Indeed, such an extension could exacerbate rank stagnation, limit opportunities for younger officers, and further weaken morale within the force.
*The Way Forward*
Reforms to the Nigerian Police must be guided by institutional integrity rather than individual interests.
Key priorities should include:
– Strict adherence to statutory retirement rules
– Compliance with constitutional and legal procedures for appointing the IGP
– Insulation of police leadership from political interference
– Investment in training, welfare, and professional development
– Transparent and participatory legislative processes for future reforms
*Conclusion*
The four-year tenure provision in the Nigeria Police Act 2020 was a forward-looking reform intended to stabilise leadership and promote long-term institutional development.
However, its recent amendment has undermined both the letter and spirit of that reform.
When laws are altered to serve immediate political interests rather than institutional stability, the consequences are predictable: erosion of public trust, weakening of institutions, and setbacks in democratic governance.
Nigeria’s police reform agenda must return to its foundational objective – building a professional, accountable, and democratically governed police force anchored in the rule of law.
Mr Okechukwu Nwanguma is the Executive Director, Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) #Securitynewsalert.com
