The Minister of Power,  Adebayo Adelabu, must have smarted from the embarrassing fallout his comments about Nigerians and their habits of energy efficiency generated. While addressing the public last Thursday, he noted how Nigerians waste energy by keeping their freezers and air conditioners running even when not at home. He said the habit of energy preservation eludes us because energy is too cheap in our part of the world.

The media quotes him as saying, “A lot of people will come back from work, they want to have dinner, or they want to see their colleagues down the road, they switch on the AC for the room to be cooling before they come back. Some people will be going to work in the morning, a freezer that you left on for days, they will still leave it on when all the items in the freezer are frozen and 5, 6, 8 hours of their absence will not make it to defreeze, they will still leave it to be consuming power just because we are not paying enough. We have all been overseas before; we know how conscious the power consumers are about electricity consumption.”

If I had been at that gathering, I would have asked Adelabu how frequently he turns off the refrigerator in his houses in Ibadan, Abuja, and elsewhere, to preserve energy. Also, does he wait until he starts sweating into the folds of his agbada before he turns on the air-conditioning system? In trying to clarify the broader context in which the minister addressed the public, former media aide Tolu Ogunlesi noted that the manner in which people ran with the “freezer” gaffe was “sad” and “unfortunate” because it distracted from the main points of the public address. Actually, what is really sad and unfortunate here is that the minister chose to be pedestrian. He walked into it.

Unlike his thought clarifier, I do not take the quoted statement as a case of wrong choices of examples; I see it as the extent to which he understands energy issues as they play out in mundane situations. In case Adelabu has not noticed, appliances like refrigerator/freezer are not designed to be unplugged. As long as a home (or office) is occupied, the refrigerator works itself to its death.

Three crucial issues stood out from his criticism of Nigerians’ energy consumption habits. One, his selection of appliances—freezer and air-conditioning—are interesting for far more reasons than why he chose them. In 2013, an American guy called Todd Moss (a vice president and senior fellow at the Centre for Global Development), bought a refrigerator. As he closely looked at the efficiency tag (that yellow paper appended on new refrigerating sets), he noticed that the single appliance would consume 459 kWh annually. He ran the figures and realised that that single refrigerating unit would gulp more electricity than most people in African countries get to use in a whole year. Those six countries? Ethiopia, Tanzania, Liberia, Kenya, Ghana, and of course, Nigeria.

The chart he created comparing energy use figures and inequality of access has been reproduced and circulated multiple times to illustrate the reality of energy inequity. If there is one luxury that people in countries like Nigeria cannot be said to have, it is energy supply. As of 2020, electricity consumption for air conditioning accounted for about 19 per cent (roughly 254 billion kiloWh) of electricity consumption in US homes. It takes about 2,365 kWh of electricity per year to cool an average home in the USA.

So, when the Nigerian power minister suggests we overuse electricity, with whom exactly was he comparing us? Even Ghana where roughly 70 per cent of households have access to electricity does not consume anything close to what mere air-conditioning and refrigerating sets in countries like the US gulp. As of 2020, Americans reportedly consume an annual average energy of 10,700 kWh per hour, compared to the Nigerian average of 161 kWh. How can people so lacking be considered irresponsible users?

Second, our leaders should understand that contrary to the assumption that the  scarcity of resources is due to overconsumption, we are—by almost every measure—a vastly under-resourced people. We lack certain infrastructure like energy, not because we are wasteful, but simply because we have never had enough. Nigeria is a place where people have to decide whether a visitor is worth their turning on their generator (so as to turn on the fan) or endure the sweltering heat together. Countries where they supply energy 24/7 never need to worry about such things. If Nigerians cannot similarly take energy supply for granted, it is not because their freezers never defrost but because their energy supplies are woefully inadequate.

How many households in Nigeria even have freezers and air-conditioning units? According to Ogunlesi, there are 12 million electricity customers (including both households and businesses) in Nigeria. Relative to our purported population, that number is shockingly meagre. Even if Nigeria’s population were a mere 150 million  (as against the 200 million plus which official figures frequently tout) and there is an average of seven people per household, it is still not enough. Twelve million customers simply means far too many households and businesses are unconnected to official energy supply. It is either that millions of people stay in the dark or Nigeria is preponderantly powered by generators. Either way, we have a challenge that will not be resolved by asking people to deny themselves certain basic comforts in the name of energy conservation. For a developing society like Nigeria that needs all the energy it can get to grow, preaching conservation can easily become counterproductive.

Third, none of the above is to be construed as discounting the necessity of energy preservation. While I will readily agree that conservation is essential, I also urge caution when comparing our energy management practices with societies that, comparatively, have excess supplies. When those societies nudge themselves towards preservation, they are not coming from a place of perpetual lack like Nigeria. If there is another reason that Nigerians have not cultivated the ethic of energy preservation, it is also because we tend not to see the link between the energy supplied to us and what we are billed for it. There is no time in my Nigerian life that I do not recall people complaining that even though they do not get “light,” but they still receive bills from the energy company and which they have to pay.

There is a local radio show that I listen to some mornings. Officials from an energy company come on the show and take questions. Many times, when a customer phones in, it is to vent over being billed for services denied. What do you think people like that would do the very moment that light comes on? They will use it with carefree abandon. People like that come to believe that they would be inordinately billed whether they use up the energy (whenever it is supplied) or not, and so they use it so they can justify what they pay for it.

Finally, we also cannot presume that the entire responsibility of energy management lies with individual Nigerians monitoring their energy usage by turning off their freezers as soon as the contents are frosted or waiting until their skins start cooking in the afternoon heat before they turn on their air-conditioning systems. Those habits are ultimately limited in their effects without larger structural enablement. For instance, the kind of appliances we use (and their age) also go a long way in facilitating energy preservation. Advanced societies constantly tweak technology to ensure that newer models of those appliances consume less energy. You can only export some of these products to their countries if those devices meet their set bar for energy-saving specifications.

One often ignored fact is that everything in life rises and falls on leadership. Furthermore, leadership is incredibly underappreciated and not given the premium it deserves. Any group’s or nation’s success or failure can be attributed to its leadership.

For its importance, leadership is perhaps the most significant legacy of the late Okwadike Ndigbo, Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, the first executive governor of Anambra State, Special Adviser to the President on political matters, and chairman of Ohanaeze Ime-Obi FCT. He was an exemplary leader whose impact was seen not only in Igbo land but also throughout Nigeria. He was adored and revered, and some even dreaded him because they believed, correctly or not, that he was a battle axe for the Ndigbo people.

Ezeife’s life was an open book, and it was obvious where he stood on issues however controversial. He was truthful and exhibited steadfast loyalty to his chosen path; he never once attempted to be politically correct and never shied away from speaking truth to power not to offend or hurt the establishment. His Igbo people leaned heavily on him to be their face and voice because of these reasons. Thus, Ezeife became the Igbo spirit and the Igbo can-do spirit in his time.

He was not only an exemplary Igbo leader but also a real nationalist and statesman. To people with closed minds, it may appear incongruous to be both. It’s not. In federalism, being a good member of one’s ethnic group (federating unit) is the first and primary requirement for being a respectable and patriotic citizen of the country, in our case, Nigeria.

Being typical, Ezeife was a great Nigerian and a great Igbo man all at once. He was loyal to both. Ezeife said something in his last TV interview that ought to be interpreted as his parting message to Nigeria. He said that if the correct actions are taken and social justice is given a chance to play a role in national life, Nigeria will rise to become a superpower, as God has destined it to be. He had earlier in his political career warned his Igbo people to defend their rights within the framework of one Nigeria.

Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife showed what leadership should be by example, not by words, before he passed away. He became a symbol of leadership and, in time, the marker of leadership as someone who filled in the void for his people.

Let’s take a quick look at leadership as a concept before looking at the touchstone leadership lessons that may be drawn from Ezeife’s leadership style. Leadership is still the most used and misused concept. Leadership is credited with several things. Because of this, there are as many knowledgeable leadership guidelines as there are experts.

However, influence—the capacity to positively or negatively affect others’ behaviour—is the only thing that distinguishes leadership at all levels and of all kinds. It is clear from this practical definition that positive leadership isn’t always necessary. The underworld needs leadership as well, and they, too, think that honour and integrity are critical criteria for judging good leadership.

According to John C. Maxwell, “Leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less.” John emphasises that every individual has a certain degree of influence, which is why they are all leaders in their own right. It means that all that is required to persuade a group of individuals to act in a way that the leader wants them to is encompassed in influence as leadership.

The ability to lead is something that is both innate and acquired through experience or education. A unique leader like Ezeife results from a fair combination of nature and nurture. It is evident from Ezeife’s life that leaders are both made and born, anyone who dares to endure the rigorous official and informal training process. However, due to the tough and rigorous nature of the leadership grooming and the role itself, the majority of people are unable to assume leadership roles and would much rather be followers.

Ezeife was propelled into leadership roles, both by authority and those he gained via other means, such as leadership roles conferred by social graces and culture. Ezeife held high positions of authority. He was governor of a state, the permanent secretary in the federal civil service, and a political adviser to the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Yet, it is not appropriate to rely on these positions of authority, which Ezeife occupied by election and appointment, to evaluate his leadership abilities because roles created by law offer fundamental compliance guidelines and sanctions that force people to unwillingly follow the leader. What Max Weber called rational-legal authority are positions of power. In a rational-legal authority model, the legitimacy and rationality of the law serve as major determinants of an organisation’s or a ruling regime’s authority and bureaucracy. It is the second of Max Weber’s tripartite classifications of authority.

The role of Ezeife as an Igboist and nationalist cum statesman will be a more reliable tool. One is still relying on the operational definition already adopted for this treatise: leadership as an influence and its process. This is because both were the areas where his leadership influence was best exercised due to their situational and contingency natures.

Chukwuemeka Ezeife exhibited six essential leadership qualities that are crucial for situational and contingency leadership: courage, integrity, forthrightness, vision, competence, and empathy.

The virtue of courage marked Ezeife’s life. Even when angels would not, he never shied away from taking risks for the people as their leader. He was willing to pay the ultimate price (as seen by his “Eji ndu eme gini” philosophy). He spoke truth to power.

To be sure, the cornerstone of any effective leadership is integrity. Since it is the basis, whatever is built on top of it will collapse in its absence. Integrity is the foundation of leadership; without it, everything else crumbles.

He was straightforward, unambiguous, and direct. The reverse of straightforward, as we observe with the majority of Nigeria’s so-called leaders, might be elusive, shifty, oblique, or convoluted. His word was his bond, and he never wavered. He spoke his thoughts and feelings loudly and plainly. 

Ezeife was very visionary as well. The capacity to focus on the most crucial elements of one’s goals and ideal leadership style is what is called leadership vision. Ezeife was aware that both Nigeria and Ndigbo required leadership; therefore, he took deliberate steps to assume the role and performed admirably.

For Igbo leadership, Ezeife served as a metaphorical “touchstone”—he became a benchmark for worth or excellence—by which other Igbo leaders could be judged. As demonstrated by Ezeife, leadership competencies are the abilities and attitudes that support exceptional performance.

Because Ezeife lived and was at the head of the Igbo collegiate leadership system, the ethnic group, though greatly republican, remains resolute and thriving, and their essence in Nigeria is more strongly felt. Throughout his life, Ezeife famously made sure the marginalisation of Ndigbo in Nigeria was at the forefront in such a way that it remained topical.

Lastly, Ezeife possessed a great deal of empathy, which is a critical trait of a successful leader. Because of his compassionate leadership style, Ezeife concentrated on relating to and comprehending the perspectives of both Igbo and non-Igbo people. He truly empathised with the suffering of his people and other Nigerians as well. Ending the Igbo marginalisation in Nigeria, which dates back to the Nigeria-Biafra war was, in fact, Ezeife’s lifelong struggle.

Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife was indeed a living example of the six cardinal characteristics of a great leader, making him a true study in group leadership. For those who really want to be in leadership positions, Ezeife offered them a leadership pathway. Despite not being born great, he attained greatness and had greatness thrust upon him. Throughout his life, Ezeife proved: You too can do it!

Good night, authentic Igbo leader and archetypal patriot and statesman, Okwadike Ndigbo.

Dr Law Mefor, an Abuja-based forensic and social psychologist, is a fellow of The Abuja School of Social and Political Thoughts. He can be reached via This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; Twitter: @Drlawsonmefor.

The proposal to create state police and if possible local government police is consistent with the principle of true federalism and decentralisation of powers. The arrangement would enable the states to effectively maintain law and order, especially during emergencies.

Besides the Nigeria Police is ill-equipped and deficient in that it cannot ensure the safety of citizens and their property despite the huge budgetary allocations in recent years. You will be alarmed at the amount of money so far allocated to the Nigeria Police Force in the last 25 years.

Two positions were canvassed by Nigerians on the desirability or otherwise of allowing states to establish and maintain their police. Proponents of separate police for the states rested their demand on the strong ground that it was consistent with federal practice. The arrangement, they argued, enabled the federating states to effectively maintain law and order, especially during other social upheavals such as inter-communal riots, youth restiveness, riots and ethnic militancy without the often costly delays in obtaining federal approval by the commissioner of police even when a state governor has so directed or requested.

The handlings of the various inter-communal upheavals in the various states of the federation since the beginning of the current democratic governance left much to be desired. This, many people believe was due to the provision of Section 215(4) of the constitution which hinders a governor from exercising his power as chief security officer of the State.

Another example mentioned of the failure or weakness in the present centralised police structure was the inability of the Nigeria Police to contend with the high rate of violent crimes which ravaged major towns all over the country. In response to the hostage-like situation in which the states were held by hoodlums, some state governments have resorted to establishing vigilante groups which they claim have successfully dealt with the crime situation in those states.

In some instances, however, people often accuse these groups as some kind of local “militia” who would not hesitate to take the laws into their hands at will and molest people. The recent experiences in some parts of this country constitute sufficient lessons not to allow local “militia” to be formed. The Nigeria Police is however so badly equipped and unmotivated and so could not effectively deal with the crime and security situation in the country. That is why Amotekun, a security outfit for the southwest was launched in Ibadan on January 9, 2020, and Ebubeagu, a security outfit for the southeast was launched in Owerri on April 12, 2021. Similarly, Shege Ku-Fasa, a security outfit for northern states was launched in Kaduna on February 6, 2022.

Representations against state police bordered on the fear of abuses to which state governors may subject their police. These fears included those of intimidation and harassment of political opponents and perpetuation of electoral fraud. References were made to the experiences in the country during the abuse of the former regional and Local Authority Police — a development which led to an occasional breakdown of law and order.

The fall of the first Republic was partly blamed on the ignoble use of the regional and local police. It was, therefore, feared that it was too soon in the life of Nigeria’s nascent democracy for the idea of State Police to be entertained. For this school of thought, it was argued that the need for state Commissioners of Police to occasionally clear operational instructions with the Inspector-General was intended to check abuses and ensure that the orders by governors were lawful. What the Nigeria Police needed to function properly and serve Nigerians more effectively, was a restraining programme, proper funding and adequate and up-to-date equipment while steps should be taken to sanitize the institution and rid it of corruption and other vices.

The establishment of state police or local government police has now become inevitable. The ball is now in the court of our legislators to amend the constitution and establish state police or local government police. The establishment of the Nigerian police was made possible through the 1963 constitution, and so also was the abrogation of the regional police.

1. There shall be a police force for Nigeria, which shall be styled the Nigeria Police Force.
2. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Nigeria Police Force shall be organised and administered in accordance with such provision as may be made in that behalf by Parliament.
3. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the members of the Nigeria Police Force shall have such powers and duties as may be conferred upon them by any law in force in Nigeria.
4. Subject to the provisions of this section, no police forces other than the Nigeria Police shall be established for Nigeria or any part thereof.
5. Parliament may make provision for police forces forming part of the armed forces of the Federation or for the protection of harbours, waterways, railways and airfields.
6. Parliament may make provision for the maintenance by any local authority within the Federal territory of a police for employment within the Federal territory.
7. Nothing in this section shall prevent the legislature of a Region from making provision for the maintenance by any native authority or local government authority established for a province or any part of a provision of a police force for employment within that province.

In this subsection “province” means any area that was a province on the thirtieth day of September, 1954.

Section 109 states that;

1. There shall be a Police Service Commission for the Federation, which shall consist of a chairman and not less than two nor more than four other members.
2. The members of the Police Service Commission of the Federation shall be appointed by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister.
3. A person shall not be qualified to hold office as a member of the Police Service Commission of the Federation, if he is a member of either House of Parliament, a member of a legislative house of a Region, a Minister of the Government of the Federation, a Minister of the Government of a Region or a member of the public service of the Federation or the public service of a Region: Provided that a judge of the High Court of a territory may be appointed as a member of the Commission.
4. Subject to the provisions of this section, a member of the Police Service Commission of the Federation shall vacate his office— (a) at the expiration of five years from the date of his appointment; or (b) if any circumstances arise that, if he were not a member of the Commission, would cause him to be disqualified for appointment as such a member.
5. A member of the Police Service Commission of the Federation may be removed from office by the President acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, for inability to discharge the functions of his office (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) or for misbehaviour.
6. A member of the Police Service Commission of the Federation shall not be removed from office except in accordance with the provisions of this section.

Section 110 states that

1. Power to appoint persons to hold or act in offices in the Nigeria Police Force (including power to make appointments on promotion and transfer and to confirm appointments) and to dismiss and to exercise disciplinary control over person holding or acting in such offices shall vest in the Police Service Commission of the Federation: Provided that the Commission may, with the approval of the Prime Minister and subject to such conditions as it may think fit, delegate any of its powers under this section to any of its members or to the Inspector General of the Nigeria Police or any other member of the Nigeria Police Force.
2. Before making any appointment to the office of Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police or removing the Inspector-General from office the Police Service Commission of the Federation shall consult the Prime Minister, and before making any appointment to the office of Commissioner of Police of a Region or removing the Commissioner from office the Commission shall consult the Premier of the Region.

On assuming power on January 15, 1966, General Johnson Thomas Umunnakwe Aguiyi-Ironsi (March 3, 1924- July 29, 1966) from Umuahia, promulgated Decree 7 of 1966. It was the decree that absorbed all the regional and local government police into the Nigeria Police Force. The decree is called The Special Constables Decree.

The purpose of the decree is to modernise the law relating to the Nigeria Special Constabulary by repealing the Special Constables Act 1959 and replacing it with a Decree under which the Special Constabulary will form part of the Nigeria Police. The decree has eleven sections.

1. Section one—deals with the creation of the Nigeria- Special Constabulary as part of the Nigeria Police Force and what constitutes the special constabulary.
2. Section two—deals with appointments of special constables in normal circumstances.
3. Section three—deals with resignation, suspension and dismissal of special constables.
4. Section four— deals with the appointment of emergency special constables.
5. Section five— deals with provisions supplementary to section four.
6. Section six— deals with equipment.
7. Section seven—deals with the instruction of special constable.
8. Section eight—deals with allowance, pay, pension and gratuity.
9. Section nine—deals with interpretation.
10. Section Ten—deals with the repeal of the Special Constables Act 1959 and the revocation of Government Notice No. 1598 (Approval of Maximum Personnel Establishment, Special Constables Training and Allowance) Regulation 1960.
11. Section Eleven—deals with citation, extent and commencement to the Decree which shall come into force on such date as the Executive Council may be order published in the Gazette appoint.

In addition, General Ironsi promulgated Decree No. 3 of 1966. The decree deals with the detention of certain specified persons in the interest of the security of Nigeria for a period not exceeding six months in such place or places as the head of the National Military Government may from time to time direct. Persons so detained are entitled to make representations in writing to the National Military Government which may if it thinks fit constitute a tribunal for that purpose under conditions laid down in the decree. The decree suspends chapter III of the Constitution.

On Friday, January 28, General Ironsi addressed the nation during which he declared that “I have abolished the offices of Agents-General in London”.

The Western and Lagos delegation was led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo GCFR who earlier in September was named the leader of the Yorubas in Ibadan by the leaders of thought including the traditional rulers and prominent Yoruba elders at an event presided over by Colonel Robert Adeyinka Adebayo, the then Governor of Western Region. It was the first and last time anyone was declared leader of the Yorubas.

Other Western delegates at the ad hoc constitutional conference were Alhaji Lateef Kayode Jakande, Alhaji Femi Okunnu, Professors Hezekiah Oluwasanmi, Ayo Ogunseye, Sam Aluko and Akin Mabogunje. The Northern delegation was led by Sir Kashim Ibrahim. Other members from the north were Alhaji Inua Wada, Sir Aminu Kano, Chief Joseph Sarwuan Tarka, Alhaji Abdul Razak and Chief Josiah Sunday Olawoyin. The Eastern delegation was led by Professor Eni Njoku. Other members from the East include Chief C.C. Mojekwu, Chief E. Eyo and Chief Matthew Mbu. The Midwest delegation was led by Chief Eromosele Anthony Enahoro. Other members of the delegation were Chief Edwin Clark, Chief J.I.G. Onyia and Dr. Mudiaga Odje. The Midwest delegation was assisted by Chief T.E.A. Salubi, Dr. Christopher Okojie and Dr. D.P. Lawani. Chief Edwin Clark will be 97 on May 25.

On the issue of the police, the following was agreed at the conference.

1. There shall be a Nigeria Police Force which shall be organised in Regional units composed entirely of each Region of personnel indigenous to that Region.
2. The operational control of the units in each Region shall be the responsibility of the Regional Commissioner of Police. N.B. There were some disagreements on the right of the Regional Government to give directions to the Regional Commissioner as follows: “Directions with respect to the maintaining and securing of safety and public order within the Region or any part thereof may be given to the Regional Commissioner of Police by the Head of the Regional Government and the Regional Commissioner shall comply with those directions or cause them to be complied with; provided that before carrying out any such directions which may involve the use of arms the Commissioner may request that the matter should be referred to the Police Council for their direction”. The East proposed that the words ‘Police Council’ should be replaced by the words ‘Regional Security Committee’ in order to bring it into line with the corresponding arrangements in the case of the Army. The Mid-West reserved its position on the clause ‘which may involve the use of arms’.
3. Training facilities, depots and stores shall be organized on a Regional basis. Recruitment shall be the responsibility of the Regional Commissioner of Police acting in accordance with policy laid down by the Regional Government.
4. At the national level, there shall be a Police Council which shall be responsible for; (a)Laying down general policy which should include the strength of police personnel in each Region, types and quantities of equipment, weapons, minimum standards of recruitment, promotion, discipline, etc. (b) overall operation control of the Regional units in the event of the Regional Governments requesting the Council for Police assistance to cope with any actual or threatened security situation within the Region beyond or likely to be beyond the capability of the Regional unit; provided that a Regional Commissioner with the consent of the Head of the Regional Government may request the Commissioner of another Region for police assistance in an urgent situation and that such a request shall not be granted or refused except with the approval of the Head of Regional Government concerned.’ N.B. There was slight disagreement on the composition of the Police Council. There was general agreement that it should include: the Head of the Federal Government; Heads of the Regional Governments; the Inspector-General of Police; Regional Commissioners; and the Minister responsible for police matters. The North proposed in addition the Chairman of the Public Service Commission. There was also disagreement on the terms of the office of Inspector-General of Police. ‘The East and West propose that the Office of the Inspector-General of Police shall be held in rotation by the Regional Commissioners of Police for fixed periods not exceeding twelve months. The North and Lagos propose a period of three years and the Mid-West proposes that this should be held on a permanent basis.’
5. The Police Council shall be served by a Secretariat under the Inspector-General of Police. The personnel in the Secretariat shall be drawn from the Regions in equal numbers.
6. Five years after the new Constitution has come into effect, all local authority police forces shall cease to exist, and in the meantime, there shall be a progressive reduction in those local authority forces.’

EAST: (i) Original proposal. ‘The police shall be regionalised.’ (ii) Revised proposal. As in the progress report.
N.B. (a) the office of Inspector-General of Police to rotate among the regions at least once a year (b) the Regional Commissioner of Police to comply with all directions given by the regional government. (c) no mention was made of any minister responsible for police matters, i.e. at the centre (d) police to be financed by the Regions.

MID-WEST: (i) Original proposal. Federal responsibility. (ii) Revised proposal. As in Progress Report, but more precise formulation of the reservations concerning the power of a Regional Government to give binding directions to the Regional Commissioner of Police; this is acceptable only ‘if it is agreed in what circumstances the Premier may give such directions or what directions a Premier may lawfully give’. Additional stipulation that the Police Council have overall operational control for Section 70, 71 and 86 of the 1963 Constitution. N.B. Post of Inspector-General of Police to be a permanent appointment.

NORTH: (i) Original proposal. Each State has its Police. (ii) Revised proposal. As in Progress Report.
N.B. (a) Chairman of the Public Service Commission to be included on the Police Council. (b) Inspector-General of Police to be appointed for a period of three years.

WEST: (i) Original proposal. Each State to establish and control its own Police. (ii) Revised proposal. As in Progress Report excerpt: (a) a Regional Commissioner disagreeing with any direction given him by the Head of the Regional Government could request that the matter be referred to the Regional Security Committee for its direction. (b) Police Council to be able, when necessary, to call for expert advice from the Ministry of Establishments (c) Office of the Inspector-General of Police held by the Regional Commissioners of Police rotating annually.

The Nigeria Police Force maintained its statutory role until General Murtala Mohammed GCFR came to power on July 27 1975. He then set up a Constitutional drafting Committee. The subcommittee on Public Services including the Armed Forces and the Police headed by Dr Obi Wali made the following recommendations.

1. “There shall be a police force for Nigeria, which shall be styled the Nigeria Police Force. (Recommendation 1).
2. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Nigeria Police Force shall be organised and administered in accordance with such provisions as may be made on that behalf by the National Assembly. (Decisions on Recommendation 2).
3. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the members of the Nigeria Police Force shall have such powers and duties as may be conferred upon them by any law in force in Nigeria. (Recommendation 3).
4. No police force other than the Nigeria Police Force shall be established for Nigeria or any part thereof. Recommendation 4).
5. The Legislature may make provision during emergencies for Police Forces forming part of the armed forces of the Federation, or for the protection of harbours, waterways, railways and airfields. In this paragraph, “emergencies” means periods of emergency under this Constitution (Decision of Recommendation 5).
6. There shall be an Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police and a Commissioner of Police for each state of the Federation, whose offices shall be offices in the Public Service of the Federation.
7. The Nigeria Police Force shall be under the command of the Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police. (Recommendation 7).
8. The President or such other Minister of the Government of the Federation as may be authorised in that behalf by the President may give to the Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police such directions with respect to the maintaining and securing of public safety and public order as he may consider necessary and the Inspector-General shall comply with those directions or cause them to be complied with. (Recommendation 8).
9. Subject to (8) above, the Commissioner of Police of a State shall comply with the directions of the Governor of the State or such other Commissioner of the Government of the State as may be authorised in that behalf by the Governor with respect to the maintaining and securing of public safety and public order within the State or cause them to be complied with Provided that before carrying out any such directions the Commissioner may request that the matter should be referred to the President or such other Commission of the Government of the Federation as may be authorized in that behalf by the President for his directions. (Decision on Recommendation 9).
10. There shall be a Nigeria Police Council, which shall consist of (a) The President (b) State Governors (c) the Inspector-General of Police (d) The Attorney-General of the Federation.
11. The Chairman of the Police Service Commission of the Federation shall attend the meetings of the Nigeria Police Council and, save for voting, may take part in the proceedings of the council. (Decision on Recommendation 11).
12. The policy, organisation and administration of the Nigeria Police Force and all other matters relating thereto (not being matters relating to the use and operational control of the force of the appointment, disciplinary control and dismissal of members of the force) shall be under the general supervision of the Nigeria Police Council. (Recommendation 12).
13. The President shall cause the Nigeria Police Council to be kept fully informed concerning the matters under its supervision and shall cause the Council to be furnished with such information as the Council may require with respect to any particular matter under its supervision. (Recommendation 13).
14. The Nigeria Police Council may make recommendations to the Government of the Federation concerning any matter under its supervision, and if in any case, the Government acts otherwise than in accordance with any such recommendations it shall cause a statement containing that recommendation and its reasons for acting otherwise than in accordance with that recommendations to be laid before the National Assembly”.

The Constituent Assembly submitted its report on August 29, 1978, and the Assembly was dissolved on September 20, 1978. The Supreme Military Council headed by General Olusegun Obasanjo GCFR on September 21, 1978, promulgated Decree 25 as the 1979 Constitution for the country, to take effect on October 1, 1979.

Unfortunately by the time the Constitution was released to the public in 1979, the recommendations of Dr Obi Wali’s subcommittee as it relates to state governors being members of the Nigeria Police Council, was deleted. Issues like the National Youth Service Corps Decree 1973, the Public Complaints Decree 1975, the Nigerian Security Organisation Decree 1976 and the Land Use Decree 1978 which were never adopted at the Constituent Assembly were all included in the 1979 Constitution.

Till today we do not really know whom to blame, either the Supreme Military Council or the Constituent Assembly headed by Justice Udo Udoma or the three legal drafting teams of the Constituent Assembly—Justice Omoloulu Thomas, Justice Bashir Wali or Justice G.C. Okeke.

The 1999 Constitution is like the 1979 Constitution as it stands now in terms of the Nigeria Police Force. If they can, the Legislators should amend the Constitution and allow the creation of State Police and Local Government Police. It will be in the interest of everyone.

That is not to say that the creation of the State Police or the Local Government Police will end the security challenges in the country. No, it will simply reduce it.

Straight from Kuje Prison in Abuja, convicted gunrunner, Hamisu Bala (popularly known as ‘Wadume’) was received with a hero’s welcome to his hometown of Ibbi, Taraba State, on Sunday. He was reportedly driven round town in a long convoy of vehicles before visiting the palace of the traditional ruler, Alhaji Salihu Danbawuro. While many Nigerians were shocked about the development, with some expressing outrage, what I predicted in my August 2022 column, ‘Wadume and the Nigerian Tragedy’ has just come to pass. For those who may have missed the column, I recall it before concluding with a few lines.

===========================================================

The slap on the wrist given a notorious kidnap kingpin has exposed the underbelly of the criminal justice administration in Nigeria. It also underscores the seeming hopelessness of the national security situation. Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, according to reports, last month sentenced Hamisu Bala, popularly known as Wadume, to seven years imprisonment for unlawfully dealing in prohibited firearms and escaping from prison custody. Among the six others convicted with Wadume is Inspector Aliyu Dadje, station officer at the Ibi Divisional Police Headquarters in Taraba State at the time the crime was committed. Dadje bagged three years in jail for tampering with police records to conceal a crime. 

All the elements that have made our country unsafe today are present in this tragedy that has been treated so casually by the federal government. From kidnapping to criminal complicity by military/security agencies to inter-agency rivalry and the way life has become so cheap in Nigeria, this is one case that should have been used for the purpose of deterrence in our quest for peace and security. Sadly, not only has the case been cynically bungled, but we have also shown that lives of innocent people do not matter, and accountability counts for nothing. Since Wadume has already spent some years in detention, he can be freed as early as 2025. And perhaps then granted presidential pardon (the way we roll in Nigeria) to contest for senate in 2027 on the platform of whichever party is in power at the time! 

I cannot but feel for the families of the slain policemen for whom the state cannot secure real justice. What is more confounding is the secrecy that has shrouded this trial whose outcome we only got to know more than three weeks later. The judgement was said to have been handed down on 22nd July 2019, with a statement released only last Sunday. The report also stated that ten military officers earlier charged with the convicts have had their trial “separated for departmental reasons,” whatever that means. These soldiers are Captain Tijjani Balarabe; Staff Sgt David Isaiah; Sgt Ibrahim Mohammed; Corporal Bartholomew Obanye; Private Mohammed Nura; Lance Corporal Okorozie Gideon; Corporal Marcus Michael; Lance Corporal Nvenaweimoeimi Akpagra; Staff Sgt Abdulahi Adamu and Private Ebele Emmanuel. While we can assume that these were the soldiers who killed the police team, we do not know what the exact charges are against them.   

Meanwhile, this tragic story began on 6th August 2019 when a special operational team sent from Abuja arrested Wadume in Taraba State, handcuffed him and were driving toward Jalingo when they came under heavy bombardment from soldiers. In the process, four persons were killed on the spot while several others were injured. Those killed were Inspector Mark Ediale and two sergeants – Usman Danzumi and Dahiru Musa and a civilian by name of Jibrin. The soldiers then freed the handcuffed suspect, according to a statement by then police spokesperson, Frank Mba, who provided public updates on the matter.

From all that transpired at the time, there was no dispute about the fact that Wadume was freed by the soldiers who killed the policemen. In his version of event, then Army spokesperson, Sagir Musa said that soldiers from 93 Battalion received a distress call that kidnappers had come to operate in their community, leading to the hot pursuit that culminated in the unfortunate killings. Musa, who accused police operatives of refusing to stop at the military checkpoint, described them as “suspected kidnappers who turned out to be an Intelligence Response Team…on a covert assignment from Abuja.” But he gave a convoluted account of how Wadume escaped unhurt from the hands of the military men.   

Miffed by the attempt to cover up the crime, the police immediately countered by raising pertinent posers: “How could a kidnap suspect properly restrained with handcuffs by the Police escape from the hands of his military rescuers? If Alhaji Hamisu Bala Wadume is a ‘victim of kidnap’ as claimed, and properly rescued by soldiers, why was he not taken to the Army Base for documentation purposes and debriefing in line with the Standard Operating Procedure in the Nigerian Army?” Insisting that their officers were murdered by the soldiers who they accused of colluding with the kidnap suspect, the police asked, “Why were the Police Operatives shot at close range even after they had identified themselves as Police Officers on legitimate duty as evident in the video now in circulation?”    

Indeed, the clear give-away in the video released by police after the killings was the question, ‘Where is their service pistol?’, asked by one of the shooters. It was a clear indication that the soldiers knew their victims were officers of the law. That a most wanted criminal suspect was set free in the process further confirmed the motive of the callous act that points to a clear link between officialdom and organised crime in our country. And to the extent that the insecurity that plagues our country today is the product of a justice administration that places criminals above the rest of society, it is no surprise that we have treated this unfortunate tragedy in a cavalier manner.   

Apparently embarrassed, President Muhammadu Buhari tasked then Chief of Defence Staff, General Abayomi Gabriel Olonisakin to investigate the incident and report back to him. The police of course went in search of Wadume who was later captured in Kano on 20th August 2019. They subsequently released the video of his confessional statement that corroborated their allegation that the soldiers who killed their men were working in concert with kidnappers. “I am Hamisu Bala also known as Wadume. The police came to Ibi and arrested me. After arresting me, they were taking me to Abuja when soldiers went after them, opened fire and some policemen were killed. From there, the soldiers took me to their headquarters and cut off the handcuffs on my hands and I ran away. Since I ran away, I have been hiding until now that the police arrested me again,” Wadume said in the video.

Meanwhile, the joint presidential investigative panel headed by Rear Admiral T.I Olaiya with representatives from the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), State Security Service (SSS) as well as the army, navy and police went mute. Although the panel was said to have presented a report to Olonisakin for onward transmission to the president, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) broom has swept the matter under the proverbial carpet. Beyond what we are reading about “separated cases”, I am not aware that anybody in the military has been held accountable for executing three senior police officers and a civilian while on duty: No punishment for bad behaviour, no justice for slain police officers, no lessons learnt. Case closed!

I concede that I do not know the charges filed against Wadume and accomplices at the federal high court by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation. So, it is possible that Justice Nyako merely applied the law. But when you run a system where the punishment does not fit the crime and there is no accountability even for lives lost, it is the larger society that is in danger. We can see the evidence of that in all facets of our country today – which is why we should be concerned.    

ENDNOTE:

The traditional ruler of Ibbi who received Wadume in his palace waxed philosophical about his returning subject. “We are hoping that he will not go back to criminality. He came to the palace and pledged his loyalty as a changed person. Even repented Boko Haram are allowed to reintegrate into the community, so we have to accept him and take proactive steps to secure our community,” Alhaji Garba said. “As someone who has a lot of followers, we believe that by re-integrating him, he will work with security agencies and stakeholders to ensure the peace of the community. Wadume was not a hardened criminal, but someone with dubious character. The issue of kidnapping was framed against him and even politics came in; that was why the court could not convict him on some of the charges that were preferred against him. There will be a lot of talks around his release and his reception in the town, but people do change.”

Like the monarch, I also believe in the power of redemption. I therefore wish Wadume well, especially since he has fulfilled the requirement of the law. But this tragic story is more about the character of the Nigerian state than about Wadume. Given how this sordid saga has played out, what the authorities are invariably telling the families of the slain policemen is that Nigeria is not worth dying for!

From Band ‘A’ to Banditry

From the National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) cynically rechristened ‘Never Expect Power Always’ to the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) which became ‘Problem Has Changed Name’, the power sector in Nigeria has almost defied solution. Today, Nigerians have lost count of the number of times the national grid has collapsed in recent years, leaving the authorities to supply their usual megawatts of excuses at every point. On 4^th February, for the fourth time this year, the grid collapsed again, with the capacity dropping from 2,407 megawatts to zero megawatts! That pattern was repeated on 28 March across the country.

In a bizarre turn of event, the federal government responded last week not with a concrete plan to revamp the sector but with a tariff structure that is based on some discriminatory ‘Band A, B, C, D, E…’ statistics. For customers classified under ‘Band A’, said to be consuming a minimum of 20 hours per day, their tariff moved from ₦66 to ₦225 per kilowatt. At least that was what Nigerians were told. But what the Distributing Companies (DISCOs) did was simply to jerk up the tariff for most consumers in urban cities, including those who hardly receive up to 20 hours of electricity in a week!

Increasing tariff by as much as 230 percent at a time Nigerians are already feeling the pinch of other economic reform programmes of the current administration is bad judgment. Worse still, the electricity is not even readily available. That perhaps explains why the whole arrangement is anchored on rationing, based on how deep the pocket of a consumer is perceived to be, rather than on how to ensure an uninterrupted power supply to the entire country. Unfortunately, even for many of these ‘Band A’ consumers, the bills are based on guesswork since they still haven’t been availed something as basic as prepaid metres. “On metering, we still have about 15 to 20 per cent of the Band A customers that are not metered and that has to be a priority of the DisCos,” the Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) NERC Vice Chairman, Musiliu Oseni, confessed on Monday.

I concede that there are serious systemic issues across the power value chain that need to be addressed. And a cost-reflective tariff is key. But asking for more money from consumers cannot be the starting point. While the Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu is correct on “how conscious the power consumers are about electricity consumption” in other countries as against the evident waste of this scarce resource in Nigeria, he overstated his case by declaring that “Some people will be going to work in the morning, a freezer that you left on for days…they will still leave it to be consuming power just because we are not paying enough.”

For the information of Adelabu, turning a refrigerator off and on can have negative effects on the appliance and its contents, according to experts. “Refrigerators are designed to maintain a consistent and safe temperature for storing perishable foods,” according to an Indian engineer, Preeti Prabah, hence what Adelabu suggests can lead to temperature fluctuations and cause damage to both what is being stored and the refrigerator itself. Besides, turning a refrigerator on and off doesn’t conserve energy since it takes more electricity to bring it back up to its ambient temperature, experts have long concluded. Meanwhile, “the increase in temperature during the time the fridge is off can accelerate the growth of bacteria and spoilage of perishable foods.”

The power sector is capital intensive, so I understand all the arguments about the funding requirements on which Adelabu is obsessed. I am also not a fan of subsidy in Nigeria because I have seen its abuse in critical sectors just as I subscribe to the idea that people must pay market price for the electricity they consume. But there is a serious absence of transparency and accountability in the management of the power sector. Fortunately for the government, the timing is auspicious for serious reforms. With all our battery-powered inverters, solar panels and generators, many Nigerians have come to terms with the fact that we are better off (economically and environmentally) with a public power system that works for all. But hiking tariffs when what you supply mostly is darkness under the guise of some imaginary ‘Band A’, as one X (formerly Twitter) user wrote, is financial Banditry!  

Oluwatosin @ 50

From trying to help 14 children roaming the streets of Asokoro in December 2018, my wife has since suspended her professional career and business for the cause of providing functional education to 137 children and young adults, 20 of whom are now on full scholarship at three Federal Government Colleges within the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). And we are talking about children who had never been to school and could communicate only in Hausa six years ago. With the assistance of some hand-lifters, the remarkable story of the Not Forgotten Initiative (NFI) School which I once shared briefly (Amatala and Other ‘Unforgotten’ Children  – THISDAYLIVE) is a testament to the sacrifice and resourcefulness of Mrs Oluwatosin Adeniyi, who turns 50 tomorrow. On a personal note, she has been for me and our three children (Toluwani, Ifeoluwa and Oluwakorede) a blessing beyond measure. I can only wish her happy birthday, long life and good health. With all my love!

• You can follow me on my X (formerly Twitter) handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com