EFFECTS OF INSECURITY IN NIGERIA: THE CHALLENGES AND RELEVANCE OF THE NIGERIAN POLICE
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Our literature will be reviewed under the following
subheading in order to ensure clarity, consciousness and coherency
•The concept of security
•Security challenges and the Jonathan’s administration, 2007-2013
•The Jonathan administration’s response to threats of insecurity in Nigeria
The concept of security
Security is a very important issue in the survival of any Nation. Without adequate security of lives and property, the system will be rife with lawlessness, chaos and eventual disintegration. This is why security is considered as a dynamic condition, which involves the relative ability of a state to counter threats to its core values and interests. The security so concerned with by states, is multifarious. It might be military, economic, ideological or cultural.
Accordingly, the security for any state embodies a notion of order, or of the conditions necessary to maintain the smooth functioning and reproduction of an existing society. According to McGrew (1988:101), the security of a nation is predicated on two central pillars. On one hand, it entails the maintenance and protection of the socio-economic order in the face of internal and external threat. On the other, it entails the promotion of a preferred international order, which minimize the threat to core values and interests, as well as to the domestic order.
In a similar manner, Nwolise (2006:352) explained that security is an all–encompassing holistic concept which implies that the territory must be secured by a network of armed forces: that the sovereignty of the state must be guaranteed by a democratic and patriotic government, which in turn must be protected by the military, police and the people themselves, the people must not only be secured from external attacks but also from devastating consequences of internal upheavals, unemployment, hunger, starvation, diseases, ignorance, homelessness, environmental
degradation, pollution and socio-economic injustices.
Furthermore, the primary objective of Nigeria’s national security is to advance her interest and objectives to contain instability, control crime, eliminate corruption, enhance genuine development progress and growth, and improve the welfare and wellbeing and quality of life of every citizen.
The second aspect of the nation’s national security entails the preservation of the safety of Nigerians at home and abroad and the protection of the sovereignty of the country’s integrity and its interests. Also the concept of Internal security duties are generally related to activities which takes place as protest against the actions of government and non-government bodies, religious intolerance, political thuggery and agitations which are likely to overstretch the resources of the police and other law enforcement agencies.
Similarly, the enforcement of internal security duties have seen the Army establishing various units like the joint task force in the Niger Delta and deploying troops to flashpoints to douse conflicts in these areas. The crises in these troubled areas no doubt are manifestations of agitations and discontent exhibited by various groups due to government policies of deprivation, marginalization and social injustice – a situation, which has created avenues for “crises of legitimacy; the struggle for ascendancy between subnational and national loyalties, which, tend to open the floodgates of irredentists and separatist claims” (Omotosho, 2004:18).
Security challenges and the Jonathan administration, 2007- 2013
In Nigeria, the achievement of desired level of internal security particularly from 2007 -2013 was elusive. The above period witnessed the proliferation of different militia groups that posed serious security threats to the Nigerian government. Thus, such unwholesome behaviors which not only affected economic activities in many parts of Nigeria have also resulted in lost of numerous lives and property of the Nigerian citizens. This pathetic situation is critically examined under four case studies:
i. The Niger-Delta Crisis
Conflict in the Niger-Delta arose in the early 1990s due to tensions between the foreign oil corporations and some Niger Delta's minority ethnic groups who felt they were being exploited, particularly the Ogonis and the Ijaws (Osungade, 2008). Thus, ethnic and political unrest continued in the region throughout the 1990s and persisted despite the enthronement of democracy in 1999. However, competition for oil wealth in the region gave rise to agitations, violence and subsequent extra-judicial killing of Ken Saro-Wiwa and nine Ogoni leaders by Abacha's regime (Ogbodo, 2010:1). This action by Abacha's administration was condemned not only by many Nigerians, but also the international community. Consequently, the international community expressed her anger by imposing several sanctions on Nigeria during this period. Thus, the inability of the government particularly during the military era to address the root causes of the agitation (environmental problems, poverty, unemployment, lack of basic amenities, etc.), in the Niger Delta region, resulted in proliferation of ethnic groups causing the militarization of nearly the entire region by ethnic militia groups. Consequently, the government established some institutions or agencies to douse the tension in the area. This includes the Oil Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC), Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and Ministry of Niger Delta (MND). In spite of these intervention regimes, the conflicts and insecurity in the Niger Delta region persisted. To arrest the challenges of insecurity in the Niger Delta, the Federal Government of Nigeria applied minimal force in a bid to ensure that these militias drop their arms and end their hostilities against the government and the people of the area. In August 2008, the federal government launched a massive military crackdown on militants (Amaizu, 2008:11). Thus, military patrolled waters, hunted for militants, searched all civilian boats for weapons, and raided numerous hideouts. Also, on May 15, 2009 a military operation undertaken by a Joint Task Force (JTF) was put in place by the federal government against MEND and their affiliates in the Niger Delta region (Onoyume, 2008:5). These actions by the federal government were in response to the activities of the militia groups which adversely affected both the residents of the area and the Nigerian economy (Onuorah, 2009:2). Paradoxically, rather than the measures put in place by the federal government to address the challenges of insecurity in the Niger Delta, the situation led to incessant kidnapping of not only the foreign oil workers, but also the indigenes and residents of the region. Hence, on June, 2009, the Nigerian Government under the leadership of Late President Umaru Yar’adua, announced the granting of Amnesty and unconditional pardon to militants in the Niger Delta region (Rotimi,
2009).
ii. Kidnapping in the South-East Zone of Nigeria
Kidnapping as a social problem is the act of illegally taking somebody away and keeping him as a prisoner in order to get money or something in return for releasing him. The history of kidnapping in the South-East zone of Nigeria could be traced to hostilities, conflicts and violence in the Niger Delta region. In the South-East zone, especially in Abia and Imo States, kidnapping activities were mainly targeted at prominent indigenes and residents of these states. This situation was pervasive shortly after the 2007 general elections in Nigeria. This is partly because, the youths that were used as political thugs by politicians during the 2007 general elections in these states subsequently engaged in kidnapping as means of livelihood after the elections. Indeed, confession by those apprehended indicated that some politicians in these states supplied guns to youths for the purpose of rigging the 2007 general elections. Unfortunately these guns were not retrieved at the end of the elections. Consequently, kidnapping later turned to profitable business mostly among the youths in Abia, Imo, Ebonyi and other states in the zone. Thus, the increasing rate of kidnapping activities in Abia State, particularly in Aba metropolis, resulted in several foiled attempts to kidnap the Abia State Governor, Chief Theodore Orji in 2008 (Nwogu, 2008). Thus, from 2007 to 2010, several prominent men in Aba and its environs were kidnapped for ransom. This adversely affected the economy of Abia State as many businessmen and manufacturing companies relocated to other states like Enugu and Anambra. Worse still, people were kidnapped while attending church services and village meetings (Ajani, 2010). To address the spate of kidnapping in the South-East zone particularly in Abia state, the federal government deployed soldiers to Aba metropolis and its environs. This bold step taken by the government is put in clear perspective by Okoli (2009)
who states that:
Governor Theodore Orji of Abia State formally invited the Army to the State to assist in the fight against crime and criminals, especially kidnappers. Their Governor said the menace of kidnapping seemed to have overwhelmed the police...
The action of the government in response to kidnapping, no doubt, minimized the reported cases of the menace, especially in Aba and its environs. This was partly as a result of intensive attacks launched by the army at the hideout of kidnappers in Ukwa West Local Government Area of Abia State (Sampson, 2010).
iii. Jos crisis
The Jos crisis is another internal security threat to Nigeria which some observers have described as sectarian violence. This pathetic situation which took a radical dimension from 1999 has been a complex one.
According to Oladoyinbo (2010):
the crisis in Jos, Plateau State is a very complex one... it is tribal, religious and social...we discovered that politics is the major cause of some of these crises that erupted in that part of the country... there is no need for some people to use all means to dominate others or use people to subjugate others...the government in Nigeria has no courage...the government is not the solution but rather the problem...the government knows those behind all these riots, those importing arms into this country...
Thus, the Jos crisis has claimed numerous lives of Nigerians and property worth millions of naira. However, the Jos crisis has resulted to several attacks on Christians by Muslims. Indeed, from 2007 - 2010, over 10,000 Christians were slaughtered during the Jos crisis. In 2010 crisis for instance, about 500 Christians lost their lives (Oladoymbo, 2010: 15). Precisely, the Jos crisis has resulted in unimaginable confrontation, killings, bombings and other forms of violence. Many observers have argued that the root cause of the crisis was the inordinate desire by Muslims to forcefully convert Christians in the area as Muslim Faithfull’s, others assert that the root causes of Jos crisis are culture and land disputes. Thus, whatever the argument over the remote causes of frequent crisis in Jos may be, the fact remains that it is one of the greatest internal security threats to corporate existence of Nigeria. Also, available evidence has shown that the crisis in Jos which has been fought on sectarian lines may be traced to 'sour relationship' between the Christian and Muslim communities in the area. This is crucial because as Human Right Watch Report argues:
...Jos lies on the border between Nigeria's Muslim majority North and Christian majority South. Access to land resources is often determined by whether one is a native or 'indigene'... Jos is historically Christian city... Settlers are most often Muslims from the North... (Human Right Report, July 10, 2010).
iv. Boko Haram Crisis
Another major security challenge in Nigeria which has adversely affected the Nigerian economy is the activities of Boko Haram group. Etymologically, the term 'Boko Haram' is derived from Hausa word 'Boko' meaning 'Animist', western, otherwise non-islamic education; and the Arabic word Haram figuratively meaning 'sin' or literally, 'forbidden' (Olugbode, 2010). The Boko Haram is a controversial Nigerian Militant Islamist group that seeks the imposition of Sharia law in the northern states of Nigeria. Ideologically, the group opposes not only western education, but western culture and modern science (Dunia, 2010). Historically, the Boko Haran group was founded in 2002 in Maiduguri by Utaz Mohammed Yusuf. In 2004, it moved to Kanama in Yobe state, where it set up a base called 'Afghanistan', used to attack nearby police stations and killing police officers (Awowole-Browne, 2010). However, the founder of the group, Mohammed Yusuf was hostile to democracy and secular education system; this is why the activities of the Boko Haram group constitute serious security challenges in the contemporary Nigerian state.
!'
The Jonathan administration’s response to threats of insecurity in Nigeria
President Jonathan administration has taken certain measures to make Nigeria a more secure place for peace and development to thrive. The government responded by taking several measures which can aptly be described as a “carrots and stick” approach but, which have also generated a lot of debate within the country. Initial government response was predominantly the use of physical force that was later expanded to include a combination of verbal admonitions and warnings; moral persuasion; deployment of troops to flashpoints where the protesters are domiciled; the inauguration of committees and panels to investigate the causes of the threats and proffer necessary solutions and; the passage of a bill in to tackle terrorist activities. Thus In showing concern over the threats, President Jonathan in his broadcast to the nation remarked that the time has come for the country to review its national security policy as well as the functions and operations of the various security agencies therein. To further show his seriousness President Jonathan emphasized that the culprits and other perpetrators, “no matter how remotely connected to these incidents, must be brought to justice” (President Jonathan’s May 29th 2011 inauguration speech Broadcast to the nation), (http: //www.peoplesdailyonline. com).President Jonathan in his address the nation (National Broadcast April 21, 2011). Justified his action to use force against the perpetrators viz:
I have authorized the security agencies to use all lawful means, including justifiable force to end all acts of violence… I have directed that all perpetrators of these dastardly acts… and all those who continue to breach the peace and stability of this nation be apprehended and made to face the full wrath of the law.
Furthermore, the government has also embarked on an intensive training of her security personnel especially police officers under the special-anti-terrorism squad. Consequently to ensure the effectiveness of the police, the government embarked on the
acquisition and distribution of bulletproof and armored vehicles to various police commands.
2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
For the purpose of this work, the theoretical framework of analysis of this work is the theory of class struggle by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which was first expressed literally in the Communist Manifesto 0f 1848.
Accordingly, Marx in his communist manifesto declared that:
The history of all existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and Slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journey man, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another carry on uninterrupted now hidden now open fight, a fight that each time ended either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes (Bhatia,1978:291).
The struggles for the control of material values in the process of production have given rise to the emergence of two main classes in the society. Though classes are formed at the level of production, the struggle between different classes revolve around the organization of power as they seek to dominate one another (Nnoli: 2003). The dominant class emerges to protect and guard a particular mode of production and mediate and moderate inter-class and intra-class struggles in order to maintain stability.
Karl Marx in volume III of Capital, defined class in the following words:
The owners merely of labour power, owners of capital and landowners, whose respective sources of income are wages, labourers, capitalists and landowners Constitute the three big classes of modern Society based upon the capitalist
mode of production (See shivji, 1976:5)
Similarly, Lenin has also see classes as: Large groups of people differing from Each other by the place they occupy in the historically determined system of social production, by their relation (in some cases fixed and formulated in law) to the means of production by their role in the social organization of labour, and consequently by the dimensions and mode of acquiring the share of social wealth of which they dispose. (See Nnoli, 2003:167)
The concept of class is essentially about ownership or nonownership of the means of production. Ownership here includes both the control and appropriation of surplus value generated by the society. Thus, the surplus-labour is unpaid labour appropriated by employers in the form of work-time and outputs, on the basis that employers own and supply the means of production worked with. Consequently, for any division of labour to produce classes, one social group must control and appropriate the labour of another.
According to Karl Marx, bourgeoisie is meant to be the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour. While proletariat is the class of modern wage labourers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labour power in order to live, this why the interest of the owners of the means of production (capitalist) is at variance with the interest of the non-owners of the means of production (wage labourer), for instance the interest of the owners of a factory (capitalist) is to maximize profit but this is countered by the worker’s interest or demand for higher wages. Thus class relations are therefore contradictory (Nnoli, 2003:40). There is the notion of class-in-itself and class for-itself. In the former, members of the group, play a similar role in the production process, but are not aware or conscious of their common interest. In the latter group, the member are not only aware that they share similar role in the production process but are also conscious of their common interest and are prepared to defend such interests whenever occasions demand.
Application of the theory
The struggle among social classes for the control of state power has been the propelling force in the development of many societies including Nigeria. However, the basis of the struggle between the two classes is the control of the state so as to determine social policies especially the authoritative allocation of values and scarce resources. This is why the Nigerian state has become a volatile state with several security challenges. While the oppressed class agitates for a new social order that ensure fairly equitable distribution of resources, the bourgeois (the federal government, multinational oil companies, and the rich) class preoccupies itself with maintaining their class advantage, by extension the structural inequality which has led to the insecurity currently faced by Nigeria.
According to karl Marx and some keen observers, the current insecurity is as a result of so many issues, but most importantly, is the unwillingness of the ruling class to willingly surrender power (in other words not prepared to commit class suicide), Thus this have constituted a major cause of insecurity in Nigeria because some sects and groups are discontented with the ruling class, thereby leading them to engage in intense struggle and violence. Thus such agitations and struggles have resulted in class conflicts and insecurity in Nigeria. Accordingly, Karl Marx opined that the class struggle may lead to the overthrow of the ruling class or compel it to embark on reforms such as increase in wages, welfare, bonuses, political liberties, democratic participation in industrial affairs etc. (Bangura 1985:39). Consequently, whether or not this will be the case in Nigeria, it is left for time to tell.
2.3 HYPOTHESES
Based on the pervasiveness of insecurity in Nigeria and its
attendant consequences which as militated and dwarfed the
country’s march towards socio-economic cum political development and the challenges the Nigerian police have to grapple with in fighting the escalating insecurity situation which has generated both positive and negative comments from the citizenry, the researcher therefore formulated the following hypothesis:
1, There is a significant relationship between the ineffectiveness in the Nigerian police and the insecurity situation in the country.
2, Shortage of crime fighting facilities by the Nigerian police has direct link with the insecurity situation in the country.
3, Insecurity in the Nigerian society is aggravated by lack of social protection programme for the poor and unemployed.
4, There is a significant relationship between Nigeria’s insecurity and her slow socio-economic growth.
2.4 OPERATIONALIZATION OF KEY CONCEPTS
1, Security: For the purpose of this work, it is defined as a secure condition or feeling and is also seen as the act of keeping peace within the borders of a sovereign state or other self-governing territory. This is done generally by upholding the national law and defending against internal and external security threats.
2, Insecurity: It is a situation which is unsafe or inadequately guarded or protected.
3, Panacea: It is known as a universal remedy which can help put back something into a normal working condition.
4, Social security programme: is the action programs of government intended to promote the welfare of the population at large.
5, Ineffective: not producing an intended effect or not capable of performing efficiently or as expected.
6, Crime fighting facilities: equipments and facilities used in the act or process of working to reduce the numbers of crimes.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND STRUCTURE OF THE NIGERIAN POLICE FORCE
Matters of safety and security are topical issues in today’s Nigeria. Life has become precarious in our country, that is why when matters of security becomes an issue of discuss, the Nigerian police is mentioned because of her constitutional role as the body setup to maintain internal security within Nigeria territorial borders. The Nigeria Police Force is designated by Section 194 of the 1979 constitution as the national police of Nigeria with exclusive jurisdiction throughout the country. The Nigeria's police began with a thirty-member consular guard formed in Lagos Colony in 1861. In 1879 a total of 1,200-member armed paramilitary Hausa Constabulary was formed. In 1896 the Lagos Police was established. A similar force, the Niger Coast Constabulary, was formed in Calabar in 1894 under the newly proclaimed Niger Coast Protectorate. In the north, the Royal Niger Company set up the Royal Niger Company Constabulary in 1888 with headquarters at Lokoja. When the protectorates of Northern and Southern Nigeria were proclaimed in the early 1900s, part of the Royal Niger Company Constabulary became the Northern Nigeria Police, and part of the Niger Coast Constabulary became the Southern Nigeria Police. Northern and Southern Nigeria were amalgamated in 1914, but their police forces were not merged until 1930, forming the NPF, headquartered in Lagos. During the colonial period, most police were associated with local governments (native authorities). In the 1960s, under the First Republic, these forces were first regionalized and then nationalized (source: www.npf.gov.ng)
The Nigerian Police Force performed conventional police functions and was responsible for internal security generally; for supporting the prison, immigration, and customs services; and for performing military duties within or outside Nigeria as directed. Plans were announced in mid-1980 to expand the force to 200,000. By 1983, according to the federal budget, the strength of the NPF was almost 152,000 and there were more than 1,300 police stations nationwide. Police officers were not usually armed but were issued weapons when required for specific missions or circumstances. They were often deployed throughout the country, but in 1989 Babangida announced that a larger number of officers would be posted to their native areas to facilitate police- community relations (source: www.npf.gov.ng)
Furthermore, the structure of the Nigeria Police Force is provided for in section 214 (2) (a) and 215(2) of the 1999 Constitution. These sections provide inter area,
SECTION 214(2) (a):-“Subject to the provisions of this constitution (a) the Nigeria Police shall be organized and Administered in accordance with such provisions as many be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly
SECTION 215 (2) “The Nigeria Police Force shall be under the Command of the Inspector-General of Police and any contingents of the Nigeria Police Force stationed in a state shall; subject to the authority of the Inspector-General of Police, be under the command of Commissioner of Police of that state” (source: www.npf.gov.ng)
From the provisions above, three different structures in the Police Force can be identified. These are:-
a.Command (Authority) Structure.
b.Administration structure and
c.Organization structure
These structures are patterned to meet the constitutional
expectations of the Police, to perform effectively the duties assigned
to it.
A) Command (authority) structure
The Command structure, also referred to as authority structure, of the Police Force is predicted on the regimental nature of the Force and conducted along the Force badges of ranks. Thus, in accordance with section 215(2) of the 1999 Constitution, section 6 of the Police Act, 1990 laws provide that “the Force shall be commanded by the Inspector-General of Police”. This simply means that orders, directives and instructions to perform or carry out the duties with which the Police is carried, flows from the Inspector-
General of Police, through the chain of Command, to any Officer positioned to implement such order. Disobedience or failure to carry out such instruction, directive or order, attract punitive sanctions. According to Section 7 (1) of the Police Act, the next in the line to the Inspector General of Police, is the Deputy Inspector General of Police. Though this rank is not specially mentioned in the Constitution, it has legal backing, because the Police Act is a law made by the National Assembly in accordance with the constitution. According to section 7(1) of the Police Act, the Deputy Inspector General of Police is the second in Command of the Force and shall so act for him in the Inspector-General’s absence. Section 5 of the Act makes room for as many DIGs as the Nigeria Police Council considers appropriate. Every other rank below the IG, takes order of Command from him, in the performance of their lawful duties. (Source: www.npf.gov.ng)
The Office of the Assistant Inspector-General of Police is provided for by section 5 and 8 of the Police Act. He shall act for the Inspector-General of Police in the event of the absence of the Inspector-General of Police and Deputy Inspector-General of Police.
Section 5 of the Police Act, in accordance with the provisions of section 215 (2), of the Nigeria Constitution, provides for the Office and rank of a Commissioner of Police who shall be in Control of contingents of the Police Force stationed in a State. He is subject however, to the command of the Inspector-General of Police or whoso-ever acts for him, in his absence. Every other rank in the Force is legally provided for by section 5 of the Police Act. The Command structure of the Nigeria Police can be presented in the order of hierarchy.
Command (authority) structure
1, The Inspector-General of Police
2, The Deputy Inspector-General of Police
3, The Asst. Inspector-General of Police
4, The Commissioner of Police (In-charge of contingents in a state)
5, The Deputy Commissioner of Police
6, The Asst. Commissioner of Police
7, The Chief Superintendent of Police
8, The Superintendent of Police
9, The Deputy Superintendent of Police
10, The Asst. Superintendent of Police
11, The Inspector of Police
12, Sergeant Major
13, Sergeant
14, Corporal
15, Constable
(Source: www.npf.gov.ng)
B) Administrative structure
The Nigeria Police is administratively structured and divided into seven (7) departments: ‘A’ – ‘G’ with each department charged with peculiar duties. Though their duties are inter-woven, they are distinguishable.
1. ‘A’ Department: - Administration
•Direction, supervision and co-ordination of the various
department within the Directorate; Standardization of policies and procedure of administration and finance of the Force;
•Periodical review of all standing force Orders, Regulations and
other relevant instruments;
•Maintenance of Force discipline by directing and reviewing
relevant policies and instructions;
•Convening of conference of the Directors, Zonal Police Commanders (Z.P.Cs) and the Command Commissioner of Police with the Inspector-General of Police;
•Planning, administration and monitoring of the budget and
finances of the Force;
•Organization, planning and supervision of Research programmes, Management Information;
•Collating data for and publication of Annual Police Report;
•Convening the Force Tenders’ Board; and Planning and Administration of welfare schemes, e.g., Medical;
•Laison, co-ordination and interaction with other Directorates
of the Nigeria Police Force, (Source: www.npf.gov.ng)
2. ‘B’ Department: - Operation
a.Planning and organizing internal security measures and monitoring the execution of such security measures in time of emergency;
b.Direction and co-ordination of Force policies on crime prevention;
c.Utilization of Force Animals
d.Formulation of Force policies on traffic control;
e.Planning coordinating and monitoring of the Force communication network;
f.Reviewing and formulating policies on tactical operation schemes for crime control and prevention;
g.Periodical inspections of various units for effective
implementation of the operational policies of the Police;
h.Planning and coordinating joint operation;
i.Formulating policies, planning and management of incidents such as disturbance, riots, national disasters, elections, suppression of insurrections and trade union disputes or conflicts;
j.Formulation and implementation of policies on antiterrorism;
k.Liaison, coordination and interaction with other Directorates of the Nigeria Police Force;
l.Preparation of annual budget for the Directorate. (Source: www.npf.gov.ng)
3. ‘C’ Department: - logistics and supply
a.Purchase of stores, clothing and Accoutrement;
b.Planning of building programmes;
c.Construction and maintenance of Police Buildings and quarters;
d.Arrangement of Board of Survey and Disposal of unserviceable/Boarded vehicles, equipment etc.
e.Determination of costs of all equipment, e.g. vehicles, planes, Helicopters; Wireless equipment, Bomb Disposal equipment, Force Animals, Arms & Ammunition and other riot equipment, Boats, Medical, Stationers, Spare parts, Printing equipment;
f.Responsibility for the procurement of all technical equipment. Aircraft, Wireless, Medical, Armaments, Transport etc, clothing and accoutrements, Stationers and office equipment;
g.Responsibility for the allocation and distribution of the equipment procured for the various Police Commands and
Directorates;
h.Organization and direction Board of survey;
i.Responsibility for the planning and execution of building projects and accommodation;
j.Erection and supervision of the maintenance Barracks, quarters, office buildings and equipment;
k.Preparation of annual budget for the Directorate;
l.Liaison, coordination and interaction with other Directions of the Nigeria Police Force.
4. ‘D’ Department: - investigation and intelligence
a. Criminal Investigations b. Interpol c. Antiguitics d. Crime Prevention Policies e. Narcotics f. Forensic Matters g. Crime Records
h. Prosecution i. Criminal Intelligence;
5. ‘E’ Department: - training and command
a.Formulation and implementation of supervision of Force Training policy
b.Supervision and coordination of the activities of the Police and
Police Staff Colleges
c.Liaison with Police and Civilian Institution of higher learning at home and abroad for effective interchange of ideas;
d.Establishment of effective staff development programme;
e.Formulation training, research to keep pace with modern thought in the field of training, staff development and equipment;
f.Formulating a uniform standard of training in all in all Police
Colleges/Training Schools;
g.Preparation of annual budget for the Directorate;
h.Liaison coordination and interaction with other Directorates in the Nigeria Police Force;
6. ‘F’ Department
a. Research; b. Planning c. Inspectorate Division; d. Management
Information; e. Organization and Method
7. ‘G’ Department (ICT)
As it is known globally, technology plays significant role in modern law enforcement to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of the agencies. Thus, it is imperative for modern law enforcement agency
to have the capability to manage electronic databases and communication systems as global crime has become more
sophisticated.
8. Office of the force secretary
a.Promotion and appointment of Superior Police Officers;
b.Deployment of Superior Police Officers;
c.Records of Superior Police Officers;
d.Discipline of Superior Police Officers;
e.Police Council meeting;
f.Inter-Ministerial matter; and
g.Promotion Boards
C. Organizational structure
The Nigerian police Force is further structured in line with the geopolitical structure of the Country, with provisions for supervisory formations. The structure formation enables Police operational of the internal Territory of Nigeria. The organizational structure of the Police Force is represented as shown below:
•Force Headquarters
•Zonal Headquarters
•State Commands Headquarters
•Divisional Police Headquarters
•Police Station
•Police Post
•Village Police Post
By this nature, the Police Operational crime fighting function is felt by the populace. The relevance of the structuring of the Police to the defence and internal security of the nation can be appreciated by the totality of Police role in internal security. The whole weight of the powers and duties of the Police are spread on the balance of these structures. A periodic assessment and review of these structures to determine their relevance in the scheme of the nation’s defence mechanism has remained a traditional exercise in the Force, in order to catch-up with current global policing strategies as prescribed in international defence policies. (Source: www.npf.gov.ng)