Yemi Adaramodu says the capital remains under federal control because it has no governor or State House of Assembly

The Senate has explained why the Federal Capital Territory will not be covered by the proposed state police framework, with Senator Yemi Adaramodu saying on Friday, August 7, 2026, that the capital remains under direct Federal Government administration because it has neither a governor nor a State House of Assembly.

Also read: If State police are not to suffer stillbirth…

Adaramodu, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Publicity, gave the explanation amid questions over the exclusion of the FCT from the constitutional framework being developed to establish state-controlled police forces across Nigeria.

The Ekiti lawmaker said the constitutional and administrative structure of the FCT was fundamentally different from that of Nigeria’s 36 states.

“I have heard many people raise a lot of questions on why the Federal Capital Territory is not among the plan for state police. The FCT issue is different. It is under the Federal Government,” Adaramodu said.

Unlike the states, he noted, the FCT is administered by a minister who operates within the Federal Executive Council, while legislative authority over the territory rests with the National Assembly.

“Again, the FCT does not have a governor. It is run by a minister who subscribes to the Federal Executive Council,” he said.

“So, the federal capital does not have an assembly. It is the National Assembly that legislates for the FCT. This is why it can’t be different from what the Federal Government does. Therefore, the federal police are in charge.”

The explanation comes as President Bola Tinubu’s administration advances plans to decentralise policing, following years of calls for a policing system that gives states a greater role in responding to local security challenges.

The Presidency said in June that significant progress had been made towards the constitutional framework for state police after consultations involving the Executive, National Assembly and security authorities.

Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila said the constitutional amendment would provide the foundation, with enabling legislation expected to follow.

The proposed arrangement would mark a major change to Nigeria’s traditionally centralised policing structure.

Under the framework outlined in the supplied constitutional proposals, state Houses of Assembly would have powers to legislate on the establishment, organisation, administration, funding and oversight of state police.

Funding is already emerging as one of the most important questions surrounding the proposed system.

The framework places primary financial responsibility on individual states, while allowing the Federal Government to provide grants or other assistance on the recommendation of the National Police Council and subject to National Assembly approval.

A proposed Section 216A provides for that federal assistance but does not establish a minimum federal contribution, a fixed funding formula or a guaranteed revenue stream.

That could leave states with substantially different capacities to establish, equip and sustain their police forces, depending on their internally generated revenue, federal allocations and other available resources.

The National Police Council would also have an important role under the proposed arrangement. Chaired by the President and comprising senior federal and state officials, the council would be positioned between state policing needs and federal support.

For the FCT, however, Adaramodu’s explanation points to a different constitutional path.

The territory’s unusual status means it does not have the elected executive and legislative institutions that define the states within the proposed state-police structure.

The Federal Government therefore remains responsible for policing arrangements in Abuja under the existing constitutional framework.

The distinction is particularly significant because Abuja is not merely another administrative territory. As Nigeria’s capital, the FCT hosts the Presidency, National Assembly, Supreme Court, foreign missions and numerous strategic government institutions.

Maintaining federal police authority in the territory therefore has implications beyond the ordinary administration of a state.

The emerging policing reforms are nevertheless broader than the question of who controls policing in Abuja.

The Presidency has been working on an Executive National Policing Bill intended to establish the operational framework that would follow the constitutional changes.

Gbajabiamila, who chairs the Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill, has also announced a public information portal through which Nigerians can submit memoranda and position papers before the proposed legislation reaches the President and subsequently the National Assembly.

That process is important because the constitutional amendment itself must clear several stages before becoming effective.

The National Assembly’s legislative guide states that a general constitutional alteration requires at least a two-thirds majority in both chambers, followed by approval from at least 24 of the 36 State Houses of Assembly.

The process therefore remains subject to further debate, harmonisation and ratification.

The exclusion of the FCT could also become part of those wider discussions, particularly if lawmakers or stakeholders argue that the capital requires a different form of decentralised policing despite its distinct constitutional status.

For now, however, the Senate’s position is clear.

While state governments are being positioned to take greater responsibility for policing under the emerging framework, the FCT will remain under federal policing arrangements because its governance structure does not mirror that of the states.

That means residents of Abuja will not have a state police force under the proposed arrangement as currently explained by the Senate.

Also read: Former Inspector-General Okiro Warns Poor Police Funding Fuels State Police Calls

As Nigeria moves towards what could become one of its most significant changes to policing architecture in decades, the FCT is set to remain a distinctive exception, with federal authorities continuing to hold the primary responsibility for security and policing in the nation’s capital.