Meet lawmaker who voted against State Police Bill

When the House of Representatives voted on one of Nigeria’s most consequential constitutional reforms in decades, the outcome was never really in doubt.

One after another, lawmakers lined up behind the proposal to establish state police, arguing that Nigeria’s overstretched federal police can no longer cope with the country’s worsening security crisis. By the time the votes were counted, 289 members had backed the bill.
One lawmaker was in opposition.

That lone voice belonged to Bashir Usman, who represents Birnin Gwari/Giwa Federal Constituency of Kaduna State—an area that has, ironically, suffered some of the country’s worst attacks by bandits and armed groups.

In the voting process which had near-unanimity, Usman’s solitary “No” vote instantly stood out. It also raised an obvious question: Why would the representative of one of Nigeria’s most insecure constituencies oppose a proposal many believe could strengthen local policing?

The answer, it turns out, is more nuanced than a simple rejection of state police. Before the House voted, Usman argued that lawmakers were being rushed into approving far-reaching constitutional amendments without enough time to study them.
According to him, members received the report of the Constitution Review Committee only shortly before deliberations began. For a proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s policing structure, he believed legislators deserved more time to scrutinise the details before taking a position.

Read also: Medical experts raise alarm over dangers of self-medication on liver health

His intervention did little to slow proceedings.
The House proceeded with the vote, and the bill sailed through with overwhelming support.
For supporters of state police, the outcome reflected growing acceptance that Nigeria’s centralised policing system has struggled to respond to today’s security realities. From terrorism in the North-East to banditry in the North-West, farmer-herder clashes in the Middle Belt, kidnapping across the South and oil theft in the Niger Delta, many security experts have long argued that policing should be brought closer to the communities it serves.

The federal police, with roughly 370,000 officers for a population estimated at more than 220 million, have often been criticised as overstretched, underfunded and too centralised to respond effectively to local threats.

Successive administrations have acknowledged these shortcomings. Over the years, governors, traditional rulers, security experts and civil society organisations have repeatedly renewed calls for state police, arguing that governors already shoulder much of the financial burden of policing in their states despite having no operational control over officers.

Opponents have consistently warned that giving governors control of state police could expose opposition politicians, critics and even traditional institutions to intimidation, particularly in states where democratic institutions remain weak.

Those concerns have not disappeared. Instead, lawmakers backing the constitutional amendment say safeguards have been built into the proposed framework to reduce the risk of abuse while allowing states to establish their own police services alongside the Nigeria Police Force.

Even so, Usman appeared unconvinced that lawmakers had sufficiently interrogated the bill before voting.
His objection was largely procedural rather than ideological. At no point did he argue that insecurity was not a serious national problem. Rather, his position suggested that constitutional reforms of such magnitude deserve careful examination instead of hurried approval.

Whether Nigerians agree with him or not, his vote has highlighted an issue that often receives little public attention: how thoroughly Parliament examines constitutional amendments before passing them.

There is another layer of irony to his position.
Birnin Gwari, one of the local government areas he represents, has become almost synonymous with bandit attacks over the past decade. Communities have repeatedly suffered killings, abductions, attacks on highways and displacement, making the constituency one of the strongest examples often cited by advocates of decentralised policing.

That reality has prompted some observers to question why a representative from such an area would oppose the bill. But his push back, however seem more procedural.

However, the constitutional amendment has already secured passage in both chambers of the National Assembly. But several hurdles remain before Nigerians begin to see state police.

The proposal must still receive the approval of at least 24 state Houses of Assembly before it is transmitted to President Bola Tinubu for assent. Only then would the constitutional changes take effect.

In many ways, therefore, the parliamentary vote marked not the end of the debate but the beginning of a more complicated conversation.

History may ultimately judge whether Bashir Usman’s concerns were justified or misplaced. But in a vote where almost everyone said yes, his lone “No” ensured that, for at least one day, he became the most talked-about lawmaker in the House of Representatives.