The House of Representatives has passed the State Police Bill following the adoption of the report of the House Committee on Constitution Review.
A total of 211 lawmakers voted in support of the bill, securing its passage.
Presenting the committee’s report, the Chairman of the House Committee on Constitution Review, Benjamin Kalu, said the proposed legislation would strengthen Nigeria’s security architecture.
He said President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Executive Bill had facilitated the passage of the constitutional amendment establishing state police.
READ ALSO: State Police Bill Reflects National Consensus, Not Politics – Senate
According to him, the legislation represents a practical step towards providing Nigeria with a legal framework for state policing.
Kalu described the amendment as a historic opportunity and urged members to support the bill.
Following the passage of the bill, the Minority Caucus condemned the process adopted by the House, alleging that it violated both the 1999 Constitution and the House Standing Orders.
Addressing journalists after staging a walkout during plenary, the Minority Leader, Fred Agbedi, accused the Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas, of failing to follow the constitutional procedure required to pass the bill.
The caucus said it supports the establishment of state police but objected to the manner in which the legislation was considered.
“What we asked for, and the only thing we requested, was to follow due process,” Agbedi said.
He said the Minority Caucus would continue to act in the interest of Nigerians.
Speaking further, Agbedi said members of the caucus left the chamber because they were denied the opportunity to debate and vote on the bill in accordance with constitutional requirements.
“We are not against the creation of state police. Whatever is going to remedy insecurity in this country, the Minority Caucus is ready to support. But any action taken by Parliament must follow due process,” he said.
Agbedi argued that constitutional alteration bills should be considered clause by clause, with each provision receiving the support of at least two-thirds of members, rather than being decided by a voice vote.
He said the Minority Caucus had earlier discussed proposed amendments with the Speaker and expected to move them during consideration of the bill. Instead, he alleged, the bill was put to a voice vote without lawmakers being allowed to propose amendments or cast individual votes.
“For Mr Speaker to sit as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, read the long title and determine a constitutional alteration that requires a two-thirds majority by voice vote is absurd,” he said.
Agbedi further alleged that he was ruled out of order while attempting to raise a constitutional point of order, prompting the caucus to walk out of the chamber.
Minority Caucus spokesperson Afam Ogene also criticised the process, arguing that the House failed to comply with Section 9(2) of the 1999 Constitution, which prescribes the procedure for altering the Constitution.
He said the official attendance register should have been used to determine whether the required number of lawmakers participated in the exercise.
“The Constitution is the grand norm. It is the rule book upon which even our Standing Orders derive their strength. To disregard the clear provisions of Section 9(2) is a great affront to the workings of the House of Representatives,” Ogene said.
The Minority Caucus maintained that its protest was directed at the procedure adopted by the House and not at the proposal to establish state police.
