The minority caucus staged a walkout as the House passed the state police bill, alleging a breach of due process
The Minority Caucus in the House of Representatives on Thursday staged a walkout during plenary after the House passed the Constitution Alteration Bill seeking to establish state police, accusing the leadership of violating constitutional provisions and the House Standing Orders.
The bill scaled its consideration after the House, sitting as the Committee of the Whole, adopted the report on the proposal and approved it through a voice vote presided over by Speaker Abbas Tajudeen.
The passage marks another milestone in the ongoing constitutional amendment process aimed at creating state police, a proposal that has gained momentum amid worsening insecurity across the country.
The protest erupted shortly after the bill was passed, with minority lawmakers insisting that a constitutional amendment should not have been determined by a voice vote but through clause-by-clause consideration and voting.
Addressing journalists after the walkout, Minority Leader Fred Agbedi (PDP, Bayelsa) stressed that the caucus was not opposed to the creation of state police but objected to what it described as a violation of due legislative process.
“We are not against the establishment of state police. Whatever is going to remedy the insecurity in this country, we are ready to support it. But any action taken by parliament must follow due process,” Rep. Agbedi said.
He argued that, under the House Standing Orders and the Constitution, every clause of a constitutional alteration bill must be considered individually, allowing lawmakers to vote and propose amendments where necessary.
Citing Order 13 Rule 15(a) of the House Standing Orders, Agbedi maintained that each clause should be deemed passed only after securing the support of two-thirds of members.
According to him, the procedure adopted denied lawmakers the opportunity to debate specific provisions or present amendments despite earlier discussions with the speaker on contentious areas of the bill.
He said the speaker, acting as chairman of the committee of the whole, merely read the long title of the bill before calling for a voice vote.
“For Mr Speaker to sit as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, read only the long title and then put it to a voice vote on a constitutional alteration that requires thorough clause-by-clause consideration is absurd,” he said.
Agbedi further disclosed that the minority caucus decided to leave the chamber after he was ruled out of order while attempting to raise a constitutional point of order.
“As minority leader, I raised a point of order, but before I could even state it, I was ruled out of order. The chairman ought to have heard my point before deciding whether it complied with the rules or the Constitution,” he said.
He warned that denying minority lawmakers the opportunity to raise constitutional issues undermines parliamentary democracy and the credibility of the legislature.
Agbedi also questioned the validity of using a voice vote to determine a constitutional amendment, arguing that such a process requires a verifiable record of lawmakers’ votes.
“If we had walked out, where are our votes? Can you count anybody’s votes? Can you decide a constitutional amendment with a voice vote? No, it is not possible,” he said.
He insisted that the minority caucus would have supported the creation of state police while proposing amendments to strengthen the legislation.
The minority leader said the controversy was not about partisan differences but about safeguarding the integrity of the National Assembly and ensuring compliance with constitutional requirements.
He urged Nigerians to remain vigilant, pledging that the caucus would continue to resist actions it considers inconsistent with the rule of law.
“We stand on the side of Nigerians. We stand on the side of the rule of law. We stand on the side of what will make Nigeria a great nation,” he added.
Also speaking, the spokesperson of the caucus, Afam Ogene (ADC, Anambra), described the procedure as a violation of Section 9(2) of the 1999 Constitution, which governs constitutional alterations.
According to him, constitutional alteration bills require the participation and approval of at least two-thirds of members, making a voice vote insufficient.
“A Constitution alteration bill is not a mere amendment. Section 9(2) clearly provides that two-thirds of members must participate in that process,” Rep. Ogene said.
He also questioned how the House determined the number of members present during the proceedings, arguing that attendance registers, not verbal declarations, should form the basis for establishing quorum.
“The proper way of determining members present is through the attendance register signed by lawmakers on each legislative day,” he said.
Ogene disclosed that the minority caucus had prepared and submitted a comprehensive list of proposed amendments for consideration during the clause-by-clause stage but was denied the opportunity to present them.
“We came prepared with a compendium of proposed amendments, but as everyone witnessed, no one was given the opportunity to make any input,” he said.
He maintained that the speaker’s decision to proceed despite objections from the minority amounted to a disregard for constitutional provisions governing the amendment process.
The House passed the state police bill four weeks after its approval by the Senate, completing the National Assembly’s consideration of the proposed constitutional amendment.
The legislation seeks to replace the current single Nigeria Police Force structure with a dual policing system comprising a Federal Police Service and separate State Police Services.
Under the bill, state governors would be empowered to appoint commissioners of police for their respective states, subject to confirmation by the relevant State Houses of Assembly.
It also spells out the operational relationship between governors and state police commands. Section 17(6) provides that a governor may issue lawful written directives of a general policy nature to the Commissioner of Police on matters relating to the maintenance of public safety and public order within the state.
To address concerns over possible political misuse of state police, the bill includes safeguards to protect civil liberties and democratic rights. Section 17(7) stipulates that a state Commissioner of Police “shall not arrest, detain, investigate or deploy force against any person, political party or group merely for criticizing the government except in accordance with the law.”
The provision is intended to prevent state police from being used to target opposition politicians, journalists, activists or other critics of government, while ensuring that all law enforcement actions comply with due process and existing legal provisions.
The bill was transmitted to the National Assembly by President Bola Tinubu as part of his administration’s broader efforts to reform Nigeria’s security architecture and strengthen policing across the country.
