Aleke Aleke
The legality or otherwise of the tenure of the 22nd Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, has dominated public discourse since September 2024, when the incumbent police chief attained the compulsory retirement age of 60 years as provided for in the public service rules.
Egbetokun, who took the the mantle of leadership of one the nation’s lead law enforcement agencies- the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), in June 2023, replaced the 21st IGP, Usman Alkali, after his appointment by President Bola Tinubu.
Interestingly, this is not the first time the nation’s top cop is facing this kind of criticism and growing concern from citizens and civil society organisations over retirement age and tenure elongation.
Recalling the controversies that trailed the tenure of the two previous IGPs before Kayode Egbetokun, name: Mohammed Adamu and Alkali, a rights activist, Maxwell Okpara, stressed that Egbetokun had by virtue of legal instruments governing the service of police officers retired from service and therefore no longer qualified to continue to parade himself as the IGP, having attained the retirement age of 60.
In a telephone chat Okpara explained: “In the first instance, for you to be appointed an IG of Police, you must be a serving police officer. Section 215 of the Constitution says that the IG must be appointed among serving police officers, not a retired officer”.
While going down memory lane, the human rights lawyer noted that history was repeating itself with Egbetokun and the NPF.
He added: “When former President Muhammadu Buhari extended the tenure of former IGP, Mohammed Adamu, I challenged the matter in court and the then Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, invited me and we argued it out.
“Malami saw reasons with me and he advised the president accordingly, even when they had already extended his tenure by three months. But while he was in Imo State on official duty, the president announced his removal from office, and IG Usman Alkali was appointed.
“Alkali also faced similar fate, when his tenure was extended after attaining retirement age. I went to court again and challenged it. While the matter was pending in court, President Bola Tinubu was sworn in as the president.
“I wrote him and attached all relevant documents. They invited me and we discussed it and they promised to do something about it and finally they sacked Alkali and appointed Kayode Egbetokun.”
He, however, noted that in order to push its agenda, the new administration moved to amend section 7 of the Police Act so that, “I will not have a ground again to go to court.”
Okpara averred that because the proponents of the agenda felt that what he was relying on was Police Act, they quickly amended it, arguing that “once you are appointed as a police IG you must be there for four years.”
He further explained: “Assuming an IG is appointed for a four-year term in office and along the line he became incapacitated, he will be shown the way out.
“He can be incapacitated as a result of heath condition; it could be as a result of death or retirement. If you attain the age of retirement before the expiration of your four-year term of office, you must exit.
“Another question about this amendment is if it can take retroactive effect? Again, is it only Police Act that regulates the tenure of IG of police? The answer is no, because we have Pension Act, we have Public Service Rule which states that a public servant will retire from service when he attains the age of 60 or 35 years in service whichever comes first.
“Now that he has retired after attaining the age of 60 and the president still gave him an appointment, is he being appointed as a police officer or a retired police officer? Is he going to collect salary now as a pensioner or as an active police officer. Is he going to wear police uniform? They just want to destroy the police.”
On whether the amended Police Act did not invalidate the Pension Act and the Public Service Rule, Okpara said: “You cannot use an act to invalidate another act. The constitution is the grand norm and it said that the appointment must be made amongst serving police officers.
“Egbetokun is no longer a serving police officer, he has retired, and you cannot extend retirement age of only one person. If you want to extend the retirement age, it must follow the example of the judiciary where the retirement age was moved to 70 years instead of 60.
“NJC Act did not single out the CJN in its amendment, what the Police Act is attempting to do is to destroy the law”.
Okpara also disclosed that he is already in court with the federal government over the matter.
In his suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/342/2024 filed in September 2024, Mr Okpara contended that Mr Egbetokun, who was born on 4 September 1964, clocked the mandatory retirement age of 60 in 2024, according to the Public Service Rule, and was expected to have left office. The matter is still pending in court.
While Okpara mentioned two immediate past Inspector Generals of Police, Adamu and Alkali, it is on record that former IGP Ibrahim Idris Kpotun, and couple of others also faced similar fate.
Nevertheless, while Maxwell Okpara, the 2023 presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), Omoyele Sowore, the Executive Director, Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC), Okechukwu Nwanguma, amongst several other critics are not alone in insisting that IGP’s continue stay in office is an act of illegality, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), dismissed the notion that IGP’S four years tenure is an act of illegality, asserting that
the continuous stay in office of the IGP, Egbetokun, is legal and lawful.
A statement personally signed by him, averred that: “The appointment of Egbetokun which took effect from 31st day of October, 2023 would have come to an end on his attainment of 60 years of age on 4th day of September, 2024.
“However, before his retirement age, the Police Act was amended to allow the occupant of the office to remain and complete the original four year term granted under Section 7 (6) of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that he has attained the age of 60 years”.
He further explained: “This has therefore, statutorily extended the tenure of office of Egbetokun to and including 31st day of October, 2027 in order to complete the four year tenure granted to him.
“For the avoidance of doubt, Egbetokun’s continuous stay in office is in line with the provisions of the Police Act amended in 2024 which allow the occupant of the office to enjoy a term of four years effective from the date of his appointment as IGP, in this case, 31st day of October 2023”.
The, advisory, the minister said, was necessary for the guidance of the general public.
While the pronouncement by the chief law officer of the federation would have ordinarily put an end to the raging legal debate, it added fuel to the flame, as some legal experts agreed with him, while a few others vehemently disagreed, citing the principle of non-retroactivity in law.
A couple of others also raised moral and legitimacy questions.
Giving credence to the stance of the justice minister on this subject matter, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Kunle Adegoke, said that while the move might not explicitly violate any constitutional provisions, its legality remained subject of judicial interpretation.
Adegoke who spoke on the subject matter, explained that the general rule of appointment and reappointment allowed the appointing authority to extend an official’s tenure unless a statute explicitly forbids it.
He said :“Where a specific tenure is provided by law, it may not be within the power of the appointing authority to extend it, except where a second term is allowed.
“However, in cases where the law does not expressly prohibit reappointment or tenure elongation, the general rule is that what is not forbidden is permitted.”
Adegoke also pointed out, that there are differences between civil service regulations and the laws governing the police and military.
“Members of the armed forces, police, and paramilitary organisations have special rules guiding their appointments and tenures. They are not necessarily bound by the general civil service regulations. So, that is what distinguishes the civilian from the military or paramilitary institutions existing in the country,” he pointed out.
Some other legal experts however, argued that the civil service regulations are inferior to an Act of Parliament, hence the continuing in office of the IGP after attaining the retirement age remains legal and binding.
The Executive Director, RULAAC, Nwanguma, questioned the the legislative process that amended the Police Act.
Nwanguma posited that in the ongoing controversy surrounding Egbetokun’s tenure extension, the key issues are not merely legal compliance but the legitimacy of both the legislative process that amended the Police Act and the extension itself.
He said: “While the Attorney General’s perspective suggests that Egbetokun may legally remain in office despite surpassing the 60-year age limit, the broader implications of legitimacy are significant.
“The public outcry concerning the process and the extension should be a primary concern for Egbetokun, especially given the discontent within the Nigeria Police Force (NPF)”.
He posited that many senior officers feel that their career trajectories have been compromised by this extension.
His words: “The amendment bill that facilitated this tenure extension originated from President Tinubu, for whom Egbetokun served as chief security officer during his time as Governor of Lagos State”.
Egbetokun’s public expressions of loyalty to Tinubu, he said, raise questions about the neutrality of the amendment process, especially when the Nigerian Senate, led by Godswill Akpabio, exhibited a willingness to swiftly carry out the President’s directives.
He stressed that the unprecedented speed at which the bill passed through all legislative readings—complete with no public hearing—further erodes its legitimacy.
He therefore queried: “How can such a critical amendment to the Police Act be enacted without public consultation?”
He further averred that the outcry regarding the amendment process and Egbetokun’s tenure extension was a vital concern for both him and the government, especially if they profess to value due process, transparency, and public trust.
Giving vent to the opinion earlier expressed by Maxwell Okpara, Nwanguma stated that even if the amendment withstands legal scrutiny, questions about its retroactive application remain.
Again, he asked: “Should Egbetokun benefit from an amendment made while he was already in office?”
He stressed that this challenges the principle of non-retroactivity in law and raises further legal and ethical considerations.
The RULAAC Executive Director noted that while legalities may outline the framework of governance, it is the legitimacy of actions taken that will ultimately determine public faith in institutions like the NPF.
Egbetokun’s focus, he said should shift from merely defending his legal standing to addressing the very real concerns surrounding the legitimacy of his position and the processes that brought him here.
Like Sowore
who continues to insist that the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun is an ‘illegal IGP’, another critic, Hamza Dantani,
aligns with Sowore’s thought, arguing that the actions of the president in amending the Police Act solely to benefit Egbetokun contravene the nation’s constitution.
He explained that section 42 of the Constitution explicitly prohibits all forms of discrimination, whether based on ethnicity, place of origin, religion, sex, or politics.
He alleged that by influencing the National Assembly to favour an individual from his ethnic stock, the president has violated the spirit, if not the letter of the constitution, adding that such actions weaken the rule of law and set a harmful precedent for future leaders.
Also expressing his legal opinion on the four years terms for the IGP, as provided for in the amended Police Act, the Secretary of the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP), Tonye Jaja, faulted Fagbemi’s position, insisting that only an amendment of the 1999 constitution could legalise the tenure extension.
Jaja premised his stance on sections 214, 215 and 216 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended).
According to him, “Respected Honourable AGF knows fully well that by an application of the BLUE PENCIL RULE and Section 1 (3) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended), the said Section 7(6) of the Police (amendment) Act, 2024, which purports to extend the tenure of the IGP is unconstitutional to the extent of its inconsistency with the provisions of sections 214, 215 and 216 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended).
“This view is supported by the judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the case of Attorney General of Bendel State vs. Attorney General of the Federation (1982) NCLR 1.”
Amidst this fierce legal debate over IGP’s tenure elongation, the Police Service Commission (PSC), last week approved the immediate retirement of senior police officers who have spent more than 35 years in service and those above 60 years of age.
A statement by Head, Press and Public Relations, Ikechukwu Ani, said, “The Police Service Commission rose from its first extraordinary meeting with the approval for the immediate retirement of senior Police Officers who have spent more than 35 years in service and those above 60 years of age.
“The Commission at its 24th Plenary Meeting of 27th and 28th September 2017 had approved that the force entrants should have their date of appointment in the Force against the date of their enlistment.
“The Commission has passionately revisited their decision and has come to the conclusion that the said decision
in its intent and purpose contradicted the principle of merger of service in the public service and it is in violation of
Public Service Rule No 020908 ( i & ii) which provides for retirement on attainment of 35 years in service or 60 years of age.
“Accordingly, the Commission at its 1st extra ordinary meeting of the 6th Management Board held today, Friday, 31st January 2025, approved the immediate retirement of those officers who have spent more than 35 years in service and those above 60 years of age”.
Ani said that the Commission’s decision has been conveyed to the IGP for implementation.
