By Kehinde Adewole
“When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the aeroplane takes off against the wind, not with it.” – Henry Ford
In democratic societies, the right to protest is a valued aspect of civil liberties, protected by constitutions and upheld by the judiciary.
Nevertheless, for specific institutions responsible for ensuring public order and national security, such as the military and police, this right is legally limited due to considerations of discipline, hierarchy, and the need for national stability.
In Nigeria, active police personnel are included in this category, and it is vital to grasp the legal and institutional framework that underpins this restriction for meaningful discussions.
The Nigeria Police Force operates under the Police Act of 2020, which sets forth the standards for the operational and ethical behaviour of its officers. A key principle of the Act—and policing worldwide—is the emphasis on discipline maintained through a strict chain of command. This hierarchy is not just symbolic; it is essential for the effective operation of the police as a unified entity.
Within this framework, open dissent in the form of protest is seen not as a legitimate right but as a potential breach of discipline, capable of undermining the authority of superiors and the internal coherence of the Force.
According to Section 137 of the Police Act, no police officer shall be a member of any trade union or political association or engage in any form of industrial action.
Furthermore, Section 118 empowers the Police Service Commission (PSC) to handle complaints, grievances, and disciplinary matters internally.
The implication is clear: while police officers may have legitimate concerns about welfare, pay, or working conditions, the law requires these grievances to be channelled through designated administrative and institutional routes, not through protests, strikes, or public demonstrations.
This restriction is not unique to Nigeria. In many countries, democratic and otherwise, serving police officers are barred from engaging in protests.
The rationale is simple: the police are the custodians of public order. If they protest or strike, they create a vacuum in national security and potentially provoke instability.
In nations already grappling with fragile institutions and security challenges, such actions could have far-reaching consequences.
Critics may argue that this legal constraint suppresses the rights of officers to demand better conditions. And they’re right to raise concerns; police personnel deserve fair treatment, just pay, and humane working conditions.
But the answer lies not in protests but in strengthening internal mechanisms for accountability and representation. Police welfare boards, independent oversight bodies, and stronger advocacy through the Police Community Relations Committee (PCRC) and the PSC should be improved and made more responsive to personnel needs.
Moreover, rather than encouraging unlawful protests among police officers, stakeholders and civil society should focus on reforming the system to ensure that grievances are heard and acted upon promptly.
Transparent promotion systems, timely payment of salaries, better living conditions, and proper training are essential components of such reform. Ignoring these will only deepen the frustrations that often lead to calls for protest.
In summary, although the limitations placed on police protests in Nigeria may initially appear undemocratic, they are grounded in the country’s operational logic and security framework.
The key issue lies not in whether the police should be allowed to protest, but rather in whether their concerns are being adequately addressed by the existing systems.
The Nigerian government, police authorities, and civil society must take swift action in this regard. The discipline and morale of the police force, which ultimately impact national security, rely on this effort.
Adewole Kehinde is a public affairs analyst based in Abuja.
📞 08166240846
🐦 @kennyadewole
✉️ kennyadewole@gmail.com
