Nigeria Police Act 2020: A landmark reform undermined by weak implementation

The Nigeria Police Act, 2020, signed into law on 15 September 2020, represents the most ambitious attempt in nearly eight decades to reform policing in Nigeria. With 142 sections divided into 17 parts, it replaces the colonial-era Police Act of 1943 – an outdated law that had long outlived its usefulness in a constitutional democracy.

At least on paper, the new Act signals a paradigmatic shift: from a force-centric, opaque, and coercive police system to one anchored on accountability, transparency, human rights protection, and community partnership.

However, nearly five years after its enactment, the gap between law and lived reality remains disturbingly wide.

Why Reform Was Inevitable

The repealed Police Act suffered from fundamental defects. It failed to articulate a clear policing mission, vested excessive discretionary powers in the police, lacked accountability mechanisms, provided no secured tenure for the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), and was silent on funding frameworks, gender equality, and civil liberties. Unsurprisingly, these gaps fostered impunity, arbitrariness, and systemic abuse. The 2020 Act sought to correct these deficiencies by redefining policing itself.

A Clear Mission and Objectives for Democratic Policing

For the first time, Sections 1 and 2 of the Act clearly articulate the general and specific objectives of policing in Nigeria. Beyond crime prevention, the Police are now explicitly mandated to respect human dignity, safeguard constitutional rights, foster community cooperation, and treat victims of crime with empathy and fairness.
This conceptual reframing is significant. It moves Nigerian policing closer to democratic norms and international human rights standards – at least in theory.

Secured Tenure and Professionalisation of Police Leadership

One of the Act’s most notable innovations is the introduction of a single, non-renewable four-year tenure for the Inspector-General of Police (Section 7(6)). Historically, IGPs have served at the pleasure of the President, often for barely a year or two. This instability undermined strategic planning and encouraged excessive deference to political power.

By securing tenure, the Act aims to insulate the office of the IGP from arbitrary removal and promote long-term visioning. The Act also raises the bar for leadership by requiring that the IGP possess at least a first degree and relevant professional and management experience.
However, constitutional provisions – particularly Section 215(3) – still empower the President (and Governors, in relation to State Commissioners of Police) to issue directives to the police. This constitutional overhang continues to limit operational autonomy.

Policing Plans, Bottom-Up Budgeting, and Welfare

The Act mandates the IGP to develop an annual National Policing Plan, incorporating inputs from State Commands and Divisions. Budgets are to be derived from these plans, addressing the long-standing problem of over-centralised budgeting that ignores operational realities at lower levels.
It also contains long-overdue welfare provisions, including guarantees that police salaries will not fall below those of other security agencies, and obligations on the IGP to ensure the physical, mental, and psychological well-being of officers.

Yet, without adequate funding and transparent financial management, these provisions risk remaining aspirational.

Human Rights at the Core of Police Powers

Perhaps the most transformative aspect of the Act lies in its procedural safeguards governing police powers. Arrests without warrant are now tightly circumscribed, subjected to a “reasonable grounds” test grounded in verifiable facts – not stereotypes. Arrests based on appearance, age, hairstyle, or dressing are explicitly prohibited.

The Act outlaws arrest in lieu, arrest for civil wrongs, torture, and inhuman or degrading treatment. It mandates humane treatment of suspects, access to legal counsel, notification of next of kin, proper documentation of arrests, electronic recording of confessional statements, and strict procedures for stop-and-search operations.

These provisions align closely with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, whose safeguards the Police Act now seeks to apply nationwide, irrespective of state domestication.

The challenge, however, is compliance. Daily police practices across Nigeria continue to contradict these statutory protections.

Oversight, Reporting, and Accountability

The Act significantly expands oversight mechanisms. The IGP is required to submit quarterly and annual reports detailing arrests, prosecutions, deaths in custody, and casualties during police operations to the Police Service Commission, the Attorney-General, and the National Assembly.
It codifies the Police Complaints Response Unit, protects junior officers who refuse unlawful orders, and criminalises discriminatory conduct by police officers.
In addition, the functions of the Nigeria Police Council are expanded, with a statutory requirement for it to meet at least twice a year – an important corrective to years of institutional inertia.

Yet, oversight bodies themselves remain weak, under-resourced, and often politically constrained.

Community Policing and Citizen Participation

The Act formally establishes Community Policing Committees at federal, state, and local levels, and allows for the appointment of Community Policing Officers drawn from civilian populations. This codification reflects lessons from global best practices and responds to long-standing calls for policing by consent rather than coercion.

Still, community policing cannot thrive in an environment of fear, extortion, and distrust. Without genuine cultural change within the Police Force, these structures risk becoming tokenistic.

The Recruitment Controversy and Institutional Sabotage

Not all provisions of the Act survived intact. Sections fraudulently smuggled in to transfer recruitment powers from the Police Service Commission to the Nigeria Police Force were later voided by the Court of Appeal. This episode exposed deep institutional resistance to reform and raised troubling questions about legislative integrity.

Gender Responsiveness and Internal Reform

The Act is notably more gender-sensitive than its predecessor. It prohibits gender discrimination in recruitment, training, posting, and promotion, mandates review of discriminatory regulations, and provides for specialised gender training.

These are important steps, but they require urgent review of the outdated 1968 Police Regulations and Force Orders, which still govern daily police conduct.

Conclusion: A Law Ahead of Its Time, Trapped in Old Habits

The Nigeria Police Act 2020 is, without question, a major improvement on what existed before. It redefines policing, embeds human rights safeguards, strengthens oversight, and introduces planning, professionalism, and accountability mechanisms long absent from Nigeria’s policing framework.
Yet, laws do not reform institutions – people and political will do.

Without a clear implementation workplan, sustained public advocacy, rigorous legislative oversight, adequate funding, and a comprehensive overhaul of police regulations and training, the Act risks becoming another well-written law honoured more in breach than in observance.

Police reform in Nigeria will ultimately succeed not because the law is progressive – but because the state chooses to enforce it, monitor it, and hold violators accountable.

Until then, the promise of the Nigeria Police Act 2020 remains unfinished business.

Okechukwu Nwanguma

Executive Director