The Nigeria state police bill is facing delays after only five of the country’s 36 state Houses of Assembly approved the proposed constitutional amendment as of October 15, 2026. The development raises questions about the future of policing reform as Nigeria continues to battle kidnapping, banditry, terrorism and other security challenges.
According to reports published by Punch and other Nigerian media organisations, Edo, Osun, Oyo, Rivers and Zamfara are the five states that have approved the proposal. The National Assembly had transmitted the amendment to the state legislatures on September 16, asking them to communicate their decisions within 30 days. However, the slow pace of approval has created uncertainty over when the proposed reform could advance to its next constitutional stage.
What Happens Next Under the Constitution?
The immediate challenge is securing the support of at least 24 state Houses of Assembly. Section 9(2) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution requires a constitutional alteration to receive approval from no fewer than two-thirds of the state legislatures before the amendment can proceed.
With only five states having approved the proposal by October 15, another 19 state assemblies must support it to reach the required threshold. The National Assembly has already passed the proposal through both chambers, with the Senate approving it in June and the House of Representatives passing the executive-sponsored version in July 2026. However, federal legislative approval alone cannot complete the constitutional amendment process.
The 30-day period communicated to the state assemblies was intended to encourage a coordinated response, but it is an administrative timeframe rather than a deadline expressly prescribed by the Constitution. Consequently, the expiry of that period does not automatically mean that the bill has been defeated or that state lawmakers can no longer consider it.
The remaining assemblies may still deliberate on the proposal, conduct consultations and communicate their decisions. If the required 24 states eventually approve the amendment, the process can proceed to the remaining constitutional requirements, including presidential assent. Until the necessary approvals are secured, however, the proposal cannot establish state police under the proposed constitutional framework.
The delay therefore represents a significant procedural obstacle, rather than proof that the proposal has permanently failed. Its immediate future depends on how quickly the outstanding state legislatures consider the amendment and whether enough of them are willing to support it.
Why State Police Remains Controversial
Supporters of state police argue that a decentralised policing structure could improve security by bringing law enforcement closer to local communities. They believe state authorities may be better positioned to understand local languages, geographical conditions, criminal networks and security concerns that require rapid intervention.
Under the proposed arrangement, states would establish their own police services within a constitutional framework, while federal policing would continue. Advocates maintain that this structure could complement the existing Nigeria Police Force, improve intelligence gathering and allow state governments to respond more directly to security problems within their jurisdictions.
Nevertheless, concerns about political interference remain central to the debate. Critics fear that governors and influential political figures could use state-controlled police units to intimidate opponents, suppress peaceful protests or influence political competition, particularly during elections. These concerns are significant in states where public institutions may face pressure from powerful political interests.
Funding and accountability present additional challenges. Establishing and maintaining police services would require resources for recruitment, salaries, training, equipment, transport, communication and investigations. Differences in the financial capacity of states could also produce unequal policing standards, leaving some jurisdictions better equipped than others.
There are also questions about how state police officers would coordinate with federal security agencies when investigations or criminal activities cross state boundaries. Without clear rules governing jurisdiction, intelligence sharing, operational command and disciplinary procedures, overlapping responsibilities could complicate law enforcement.
These concerns do not necessarily rule out state police, but they highlight the importance of effective safeguards. Transparent recruitment, independent complaints mechanisms, professional training, clear limits on political involvement and enforceable accountability measures would be essential to the credibility of any decentralised policing system.
A Test for Nigeria’s Security Reform
The limited number of approvals shows that the proposal still faces substantial legislative work despite clearing the National Assembly. It also demonstrates that constitutional reform requires cooperation between federal lawmakers and state legislatures, rather than support at the national level alone.
For Nigerians, the debate goes beyond whether policing should be controlled centrally or shared between federal and state authorities. It concerns how to improve public safety while protecting civil liberties, ensuring professional conduct and preventing the misuse of police powers.
The next major development will be whether additional state assemblies approve the amendment and bring it closer to the constitutional threshold. Until then, state police remains a proposed reform rather than an established policing arrangement.
The outcome will depend not only on the number of states that support the proposal, but also on whether lawmakers can address the practical and constitutional concerns surrounding its implementation.