The House of Representatives on Thursday approved the Constitution Alteration Bill seeking to establish State Police across Nigeria, despite protests by the Minority Caucus, which argued that the proposed legal framework required further refinement before adoption.
The bill, titled “A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Provide for the Establishment of State Police Services and for Related Matters (HB.2797),” was considered clause-by-clause at the Committee of the Whole before receiving the constitutionally required two-thirds majority.
President Bola Tinubu had transmitted the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Alteration) (State Police) Bill, 2026, to the House seeking constitutional approval for the establishment of state police services across the country.
The President said the proposed legislation seeks to amend the 1999 Constitution to provide the legal framework for the creation of state police as part of efforts to strengthen Nigeria’s security architecture.
Presenting the report of the committee on the floor of the House, Deputy Speaker and Chairman of the House Committee on Constitution Review, Benjamin Kalu, described the proposal as a landmark reform aimed at strengthening Nigeria’s security architecture.
He commended President Bola Tinubu for transmitting the Executive Bill to the National Assembly, saying the President’s action demonstrated effective collaboration between the executive and legislative arms of government.
According to Kalu, the constitutional amendment seeks to bring policing closer to the people, improve intelligence gathering, strengthen community policing, enhance coordination among security agencies and empower governments to respond more effectively to evolving security challenges.
“This bill is not merely about creating another policing institution. It is about bringing policing closer to the people, strengthening intelligence gathering, enhancing community policing, improving coordination among security agencies and empowering governments to respond more effectively to the complex and evolving security challenges confronting our nation,” he said.
He acknowledged that the proposal might not satisfy every stakeholder but stressed that constitutional reform is an incremental process.
Kalu explained that the amendment only provides the constitutional foundation for State Police, while detailed implementation issues including recruitment, training, operational standards, funding, accountability and intergovernmental coordination would be addressed through subsequent legislation.
“We must not allow the pursuit of perfection to become the enemy of meaningful progress,” he said, urging lawmakers to support what he described as a historic reform.
During the consideration process, instead of allowing the bill to be considered and voted on clause by clause as required for constitutional amendments, the Speaker merely read the long title of the bill and put it to a voice vote.
Prior to that, Abbas announced that 311 members voted in support of the bill, comprising 211 APC members, 65 lawmakers from other political parties physically present and 35 members participating virtually through the House’s electronic platform.
He explained that the Constitution required the support of at least two-thirds of members—240 votes—for the constitutional amendment to pass.
Shortly after the passage of the bill, members of the minority caucus staged a walkout from the chamber in protest, accusing the House leadership of violating constitutional procedures during the consideration of the constitutional amendment.
Addressing journalists after the walkout, Minority Caucus spokesman, Afam Ogene, faulted the method adopted in determining the quorum and voting process.
He argued that the only legitimate way of determining members present for legislative business was through the attendance register signed by lawmakers at the commencement of plenary.
“We were shocked to hear names being read out that we do not know where they came from. The way of determining members present in a sitting is through the register. That is why members sign it every legislative day,” Ogene said.
He alleged that the Speaker, while presiding over the Committee of the Whole, disregarded the provisions of Section 9(2) of the 1999 Constitution governing constitutional amendments and denied members the opportunity to move amendments during the clause-by-clause consideration.
Also speaking, Minority leader, Fred Agbedi insisted that the Minority Caucus was not opposed to the creation of State Police but objected to what it described as the failure to follow due legislative process.
According to him, the House Standing Orders require every clause of a constitutional amendment bill to be voted upon separately by a two-thirds majority of members.
“We are not against State Police. Whatever will help address insecurity in this country, we will support. But every action of Parliament must follow due process,” he said.
He accused the Committee of the Whole of merely reading the long title of the bill before putting it to a voice vote without allowing lawmakers to consider the provisions clause by clause or propose amendments.
Agbedi also alleged that he was prevented from raising a constitutional point of order before being ruled out of order by the Chair.
“If we walked out of the chamber, where then did our votes come from? Can anyone count our votes? Can a constitutional amendment be decided by a voice vote?
“The Constitution and our Standing Orders require a two-thirds majority for each clause,” he argued.
The Minority Leader maintained that the protest was aimed at defending the integrity of the National Assembly and the rule of law, stressing that the caucus remained committed to supporting the establishment of State Police under a constitutionally sound and transparent legislative process.
The Minority Caucus formally protested the decision in a letter addressed to the Speaker, insisting that while it supports the establishment of State Police, the current constitutional framework contains significant deficiencies.
The letter, signed by Afam Ogene, argued that the bill should be recommitted for further legislative work to address constitutional ambiguities, drafting inconsistencies, jurisdictional uncertainties, governance gaps and unresolved institutional questions.
“The Minority Caucus unequivocally supports the principle of State Police. Our concern is not against State Police; it is against adopting an incomplete constitutional framework,” the letter stated.
The caucus warned that constitutional amendments create permanent institutions and therefore require the highest level of legislative scrutiny.
It further argued that rushing the reform could result in constitutional disputes, institutional conflicts and operational uncertainty.
Among its major recommendations, the Minority Caucus called for a restructuring of Nigeria’s fiscal framework to enable states shoulder the financial burden of policing.
It proposed that 15 per cent of the Federation Account revenue currently allocated to the Federal Government should be transferred to states to finance State Police operations.
According to the caucus, transferring policing responsibilities to states without corresponding financial resources would create an unfunded constitutional mandate.
The lawmakers urged the Speaker to suspend the immediate adoption of the bill and recommit it for a limited, technically driven review involving constitutional experts, security professionals, state governments, fiscal authorities and other stakeholders.
The caucus maintained that its intervention was intended to strengthen not frustrate the establishment of State Police, insisting that Nigeria deserves “the right State Police framework” that is constitutionally sound, adequately funded and capable of withstanding future legal and operational challenges.
