Presidency Criticizes Governors for Increasing Insecurity, Questions Push for State Police
The Presidency has shifted the blame for the rising wave of insecurity across the country onto state governors. It cited poor utilization of security votes and inadequate support for federal security agencies.
During an appearance on TVC’s Beyond the Headlines program on Monday, Presidential Adviser on Policy Communication Daniel Bwala expressed concern over violent attacks occurring in states like Plateau, Benue, and Enugu.
“What we are finding, very sadly, is that in some states, governors allocate only N20 million monthly to the SSS, N20 million to the police, and N20 million to the army for combating insecurity. Yet, their security votes range from N1 billion to N3 billion. Where are we going?” Bwala questioned.
He asserted that the solution to Nigeria’s security challenges does not necessarily lie in establishing state police, but rather in the effective deployment of existing resources and structures by state leaders.
“There are people who still believe that we can tackle insecurity within the current framework of the security architecture, provided we understand how to manage it,” he said.
Bwala emphasized that states have access to federal security agencies such as the police, DSS, military, and other paramilitary organizations. He noted that governors also have constitutional rights to establish quasi-paramilitary formations.
“For instance, a governor with a security vote of over N2 billion can choose to allocate N1 billion to purchase necessary equipment like drones and vehicles for surveillance and combating crime,” he explained. “That governor can also provide adequate infrastructure to assist federal agents within their states. Crime in Nigeria is dynamic; we are hearing that criminal elements even utilize drones. How can undemocratic elements employ sophisticated surveillance systems that the state lacks?” he added.
The presidential spokesman criticized what he called the tokenism displayed by governors, urging them to take greater responsibility in mobilizing and equipping security forces within their jurisdictions.
“Within the current framework, governors can utilize their security votes more effectively. For example, they can create local government vigilante groups at each local government and ward level, much like the political structure with polling units, wards, and local government areas,” he suggested.
According to him, a structured vigilance system could enhance intelligence gathering and improve responses to security threats across communities. “If you establish such a system of vigilance, some individuals may provide intelligence while others serve on the front lines against insurgents. I believe we will achieve substantial improvements,” he said.
Bwala also addressed the repeated claims by governors that they lack the authority to command federal forces. “We have continually heard this weak excuse where governors say, ‘I can’t act because I’m not the Chief Security Officer of my state,’” he stated.
He added, “If we were to create a state police force now, how can a governor, already struggling to pay salaries, manage another police system that would require further funding?
“Running a security outfit akin to a police force is no trivial matter. Do we have the budget to sustain that at this moment? I’m not suggesting we don’t need state police. However, I believe we shouldn’t wait for it to ensure the safety of lives.”
