Former Inspector General of Police, Sunday Ehindero, has defended the extension of the tenure of the current Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, stating that it is not illegal as long as it is based on competence.
In a statement titled “The Tenure of IGP Egbetokun: The Controversy over the Extension of Tenure,” Ehindero emphasized that President Bola Tinubu has the authority to decide who serves as IGP.
He noted: “In the case of Egbetokun, I know him very well, he was the ADC to President Tinubu while I was the Assistant Inspector General of Police in Zone 2, Lagos and Ogun states while Mr. Okiro was the Commissioner of Police of Lagos State in the year 2001.
“If President Tinubu chooses to work with him for the duration of four years and that is backed by law, so be it. He is his choice. You cannot by any yardstick say Egbetokun is incompetent or not qualified for the job.
“Competence backed by law should be the overriding factor in the appointment and tenure of an Inspector General of Police. Let Egbetokun serve his four years tenure extension in peace. He deserves it by virtue of his competence, performance and academic qualifications.”
Ehindero acknowledged that tenure extensions for Inspectors General of Police have historically been contentious, citing his own experiences:
He said: “The extension of the tenure of Inspectors General of Police had always been controversial. My tenure extensions twice in 2005 for one year beginning from March 2006 and 2007 for three months were not without controversies.
“In fact, the President and I were taken to court for my tenure elongation. At the end of the day, the court ruled that it was a non-issue and dismissed the case. At that time in 2006, there were no legislations in relation to the tenure elongation of an Inspector General of Police other than the Civil Service Rules and the Police Act and Regulation, CAP 359, Laws of The Federation of Nigeria, 2004.”
He further explained that subsequent legislation, including the Police Act 2020 and the Police Amended Act 2024, now permits tenure extensions for the IGP, regardless of age or years of service.
The former IG said: “Ever since, there had been series of legislation permitting the elongation of the service of an Inspector General of Police. You have the Police Act, 2020 and the Police Amended Act 2024. The latter Act of 2024 allows the Inspector General of Police to enjoy an uninterrupted tenure of four years irrespective of his age of over sixty years or thirty-five years’ service.”
Agreeing with former IGP Mike Okiro, Ehindero supported the policy of a fixed four-year tenure, arguing that it ensures policy continuity and prevents abrupt leadership changes:
He said: “I agree with Mr. Okiro, Inspector General of Police Rtd when he said, for reasons of policy implementation, the need to prevent a competent Inspector General of Police from spending ten months or less than two years, as some have done in the past, because of age, the four-year tenure for the Inspector General of Police is welcomed. In which case there will be no policy somersault.”
On the concerns raised by aggrieved officers over tenure elongation, Ehindero attributed the crisis to inconsistencies in determining service years:
He said: “As regards those officers that are aggrieved in relation to the tenure elongation, the crisis is accentuated by the bastardisation and the confusion about the date of enlistment and the date of appointment.
“How these could be mixed up is unfathomed by me. If you enlisted as a constable, and acquired, in the course of your service, academic credentials that qualify you to be appointed as a Superior Police Officer, your date of enlistment supersedes your date of appointment.
“No doubt about this. On attaining 60 years of age or 35 years in service you must retire. The date of enlistment supersedes the date of appointment. Of course, for those appointed as Assistant Superintendent of Police who had never served in the force, the dates of enlistment coincide with their dates of appointment.
“For instance, I was appointed in May 1973, as an Assistant Superintendent of Police, my service commenced then. But make no mistake, the appointment and elongation of tenure of Inspectors General of Police will always generate controversies.”
Ehindero also pointed out that the appointment of an IGP is inherently political, making controversy inevitable:
“Such an appointment is political. And politics is riddled with controversies. In politics, there is no right answer. The question is not whether your action is wrong or right, it is whether your action is valid. The President is given the power to choose an Inspector General of Police from serving members of the force with the concurrence and concordance of the Police Council.
“It is his right to determine the Inspector General of Police he could work with. No amount of pressure would make him work with an Inspector General of Police who is not his preference. You can force a horse to a river, but you cannot force the horse to drink water. There must be that chemistry between an appointed Inspector General of Police and the President.”
