Supporting police reform in Nigeria

June 2015

Dr Oliver Owen's five-year fieldwork study within the Nigerian Police Force is
providing unique research evidence for reforms aimed at improving police
performance, effectiveness and accountability.

Impact

The Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police Force has based a review on Dr

Owen's report into policing and asked national heads of departments to make
written responses on its policy recommendations.

Some reforms advocated by Dr Owen, such as more training in dispute resolution

and the employment of retired officers in training recruits, are being
implemented and Dr Owen has been invited to participate in the conversation
over future implementation of reforms.

Nigeria's CLEEN Foundation, a civil society organisation working on justice sector

reform is working with Dr Owen to develop recommendations for protecting the
police force from political interference in dialogue with the Police Service
Commission and the National Human Rights Commission.

The DFID-funded policing assistance project Justice for All has facilitated
dialogue between Dr Owen and a Nigeria Police headquarters strategy team and
has incorporated some of the outputs into its training programmes for serving
officers.

The methodological approach you [Dr Oliver Own] adopted and effort you put in place
has completely validated your findings, which are also borne out by realities on the
ground...The Inspector General of Police has already started implementing your
research findings particularly on Alternative Resolution of disputes. CP Austin I Iwar,
Principal Staff Officer to the Inspector General of Police, Nigeria Police Force.

About the research

When, three years ago, Nigeria's Inspector-General of Police described his force as a
'subject of ridicule' then the need for reform was clear for all to see. Since then, an
ESRC-funded Impact Acceleration award has enabled Dr Oliver Owen to provide
Nigeria's Inspector General of Police as well as a range of governmental and nongovernmental bodies, development partners and the Nigerian public with clear
evidence-based recommendations to address the many challenges the police force
faces.

"Public perceptions of the Nigerian police are largely negative and coloured by fears of
police corruption and inertia," Dr Owen points out. "However, research on the actual
conditions and factors affecting the Nigerian Police Force, its personnel and their
performance is scant, and missing the voices of Nigeria's 377,000 police officers. My
research approach offers the chance to put those bottom-up perspectives back into the
picture."

By working closely with more than 130 police officers based in north-central Nigeria, Dr
Owen explored the world of policing from the officers' points of view, gaining unique
insight into the problems they face and the potential for policing reforms.

After several years research in Nigeria, Dr Owen believes he has gained enough trust
from police officers and officials to take part in a serious conversation over reform.
"Often the problems and answers are well-known by many inside the system, but they
are not in a position to bring them up. By building trust, providing new evidence and
supporting frank and open discussion, this on-going research project is helping to
support the slow process of policy reform and culture change."

Further information

Dr Oliver Owen is a Research Fellow, Oxford Department of International

Development.

Working paper: The Nigeria Police Force: Predicaments and Possibilities (July
2014) NRN Working Paper 15

Dr Owen won second prize for Outstanding Early Career Impact in the ESRC
Celebrating Impact Prize 2015.

Toward realizing the police are the public and the public are the police in the Philippines Part II

There is something wrong about the Philippine National Police (PNP being under
the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). It should be an independent agency,
with its own budget, strategy, etc.
The effect, a negative one, of the PNP being under DILG is that, in localities, Local Chief
Executives, at least those who think they are entitled to it, make personal armies out of the local
police force. Technically, with this set up, there is nothing wrong with having the police force as
personal armies of LCEs and paid by the LGUs. Because structure-wise the police is under them.
The police man or woman who refuses can actually be slapped with insubordination!
Another negative effect is that because the PNP has to share in the DILG budget the address of
the needs of the force is subjected to political will and has to vie with others in the DILG for a
share in the pie. If political will of a given time isnt keen on national and local security
(because anyway theres the military), poor police may baril walang bala who are witless
against the more equipped criminals. In this case, I dont blame them if theyd rather not show up
in the middle of a crime. I mean, the best policy in this case is secure yourself first because two
dead is worse than one. With political will in disfavor of the upgrade of the force, it follows
that its administrative costs will get the least share of the pie. Therefore, what irony, in order to
survive, the police at least for some turn criminals and so become part of the complex
phenomenon of crime! The worst thing is the community points all its 10 fingers to these erring
police. Such abrasive regard is derived from the communitys view that the police force is
Superman and his wonder friends combined; that the force can do magic in the absence of
upgrade in knowledge and skills and without basic equipment. Its like PAGASA and its weather
stations and human resource. They can only effectively and efficiently predict the weather to
the extent that their knowledge and skills and equipment help them do that. Try as they could
with their bare minds and hands, theyre not the wizard Merlin predicting the rise and fall of
Arthur.
On the whole, these things make the nation less secure.
The military secures the nation from external forces while the police secures the nation from
internal disorder and lawlessness. The police cannot do its job independently and well when its
role is jeopardized by the inconstancy of politics. The PNP should be separated from the DILG
and installed as an independent entity or some other better arrangement. Besides, Im sure that
taxpayers would want that the police force take on the security of the community and so work
alongside its members, not just the security of a privileged few. Hence, the police are the public
and the public are the police. National government is currently on the drive toward reforms and
this should be part of that agenda.
Posted onSeptember 19, 2012Categoriesinstitutions, urban
management, wellbeingTagsdilg philippines, law and order, philippine national
police, police reforms in the philippines, urban safetyLeave a commenton Toward

realizing the police are the public and the public are the police in the Philippines
Part II
Toward realizing the police are the public and the public are the police in the Philippines Part I

September which kicks off the ber months not only has national and local media playing
Christmas songs but also warning citizens of increased criminal activity. As if to drive home their
point, the media deliver daily reports of criminal actions. And poor audiences, we think molded
to think that indeed criminal activity goes hand in hand with ber months (or, in this country,
the Christmas season). But, if only audiences make an effort to check on the statistics, this is not
so. In 2011, criminal activity in Metro Manila peaked in June (read here).
Further supporting the so-called increased criminal activity within this season are the increased
visibility of police in the streets (in Metro Manila at least) and related to this, the directive that
the police report to the Local Government Units.
On the whole, if you look closely at how crime is being addressed, national and local policy is
too focused on the police as the solution. It is expected that by making the police more visible,
more accessible to the bidding of local chief executives, etc., this will heighten the fear in
criminals or anyone contemplating to defy the law and that this fear will act as internal restraint
to the commitment of crime or defiance. But real life as we know it is more complicated than this
and cannot be easily slotted into such expectation of the policy. Psychologists can tell you that
fear alone cannot curb defiance of the law in humans (especially so-called hardened criminals
and those who commit crime because of the drive to survive).
In their publication, Urban Safety and Good Governance: The Role of the Police, the UN Centre
for Human Settlements (UNCHS-Habitat) and International Centre for the Prevention of Crime
(ICPC) suggest that
Security is not the sole responsibility of the police but is more an issue of good urban
governance. In other words, security is a collective task of all citizens under the coordination of
local authorities.
This perspective
however presuppose(s) a change of outlook and culture within the police and local and
national authorities. The process requires time, investment, training, fieldwork, a sense of
partnership, evaluation, and an adequate institutional framework.
And that these police reforms should be pursued within an urban democratic context. Focus
on the use of police force such as congregating them on the streets reeks of authoritarian rule or
even reminds those whove experienced it martial law. While the intention may be good, it
actually makes the wrong impression. And as those whove experienced martial law (or corporal
punishment) like to say, it doesnt solve the root of the problem. In the extreme, it inordinately

hardens the spirit (and so the hardened criminals at least those who are not without biological
afflictions whose childhood backgrounds are characterized with violence and absence of love
in their families or home environment).
The publication mentioned above mentions two key words to police reforms: proactive
approaches through a problem-oriented policing, and community-based policing (approaches).
Problem-oriented policing entails a
a dynamic public safety diagnostic processin which institutions other than the police, such as
NGOs and citizens, play a central role. It includes the identification and description of problems
in a district through (1) detailed analysis and consultation with citizens, (2) strategic planning to
establish priorities and means of action, and (3) assessment to target the impact of action taken
and make the necessary changes efficiently. This approach provides an opportunity to forge
lasting cooperation between the police and institutional and community partners.

Administrative and Organizational Changes. Source: Urban Safety and Good

Governance: The Role of the Police, UNCHS and ICRC

Community (street-level) policing is

based on the concept of geographical responsibility (which) seeks closer contact with citizens
while contributing to the development of local knowledge and expertise. (It) is basically a

professional police model spanning the continuum between two major poles: the communitybased approach and problem-oriented policing.
The publication cites Japans koban as an example of a community-based approach. It is
composed of community mini stations and focusing on problem-oriented policing which
includes the essential characteristic of close interaction between citizens and police. It is
considered an integral part of the community.
The community or street-level policing and the koban remind me that here in the barangays we
do have the council of tanods (Barangay Crime Prevention Council) whose primary task is
neighborhood policing and that barangays are supposed to have outposts manned by the tanods.
Assurance of security in communities is in fact decentralized via this structure. And securing
communities or making communities safe is said to be institutionalized when this aspect of
decentralization is working.
Unfortunately, we have the structure and human resource but these are not put to use. In an
earlier article, Ive mentioned something about looking around the country first for best practices
to replicate before setting eyes abroad. And this is another case to that.
When security is integrated into community objectives, policing becomes a proactive bottoms-up
approach. Because if you think about it, where do criminals live? In barangays, surely. Where are
crimes committed? In the streets of barangays or community centres, in establishments or
residences along streets of barangays or community centres. In other words, in communities.
Unless the State can deploy a sizeable number of police force in every barangay to instigate and
manage a community policing strategy at the same time man the barangays outposts 24/7,
security in communities is a collective task of all citizens under the coordination of local
authorities. In this, essentially, the police force isnt reporting but instead coordinating and
collaborating with LGUs (because the LGU has its own structure the tanod system which it
should ramp up).
In connection to the introductory paragraph, media, by highlighting (through heightened visual
and oral delivery) the criminal acts is actually impressing on audiences that such crimes are
worthy of attention to the extent that these are made bigger than life to the effect that audiences
feel helpless against these and are pushed to think that the best solution is to watch your backs,
keep a sharp object or perhaps a gun for defense somewhere, etc. As for the police, dump them
on the streets if only for the added fear factor. On the whole, it makes everyone fearful and
distrustful of each other. Like Gotham City gone madder. An unhealthy environment. And unlike
Gotham theres no oozing-rich-socially-conscious Batman to save the day. The point here is,
media is part of that collective citizenry and its role in shaping minds and attitudes is that it
should present criminality with intelligent discussion.