The recent appointment of a new Inspector-General of Police (IGP) has sparked intense public debate across Nigeria’s political and ethnic divides. Critics have described the decision as another example of “Yorubanization” under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration, while others argue that the appointment falls squarely within constitutional and statutory provisions governing the Nigeria Police Force (NPF).
At the center of the controversy are two highly accomplished officers: Kayode Egbetokun (the current IGP prior to this development), Tunji Disu, and Frank Mba, a respected Deputy Inspector-General of Police. Public reactions intensified following reports that DIG Frank Mba would be required to retire, paving the way for Disu’s elevation.
For many observers, the development triggered questions about merit, seniority, federal character, and whether political considerations have once again influenced leadership selection in Nigeria’s security architecture.
Understanding the Legal Framework: Who Appoints the IGP?
Before delving into sentiments, it is critical to understand the legal structure guiding the appointment of an IGP in Nigeria.
The Police Act and Section 215 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria grant the President the authority to appoint the Inspector-General of Police. The law clearly states that the President may appoint an IGP from among serving officers not below the rank of Assistant Inspector-General of Police (AIG).
In practical terms, this means the President can select from AIGs, Deputy Inspectors-General (DIGs), or any officer above those ranks. The appointment is therefore both constitutional and, inevitably, political.
Every administration in Nigeria’s democratic history has exercised this prerogative. From Olusegun Obasanjo to Muhammadu Buhari, each president selected IGPs considered aligned with their security philosophy and operational priorities.
Thus, the claim that the current appointment is unconstitutional does not align with established legal provisions.
Career Timeline: Tunji Disu vs. Frank Mba
To fully appreciate the debate, one must examine the professional histories of both officers.
Tunji Disu
According to available service records, Tunji Disu joined the Nigeria Police Force on May 18, 1992. Over three decades, he has built a career largely rooted in operations and tactical command.
His assignments include:
Contingent Commander of the Nigerian Police team under the African Union Mission in Darfur, Sudan.
Officer-in-Charge of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) in Rivers State.
SARS Commander in Ondo, Oyo, and Rivers States.
Second-in-Command (2IC), State Criminal Investigation Department (SCID), Rivers State.
Commander of the Lagos State Rapid Response Squad (RRS) from June 13, 2015, to August 2021.
Head of the Intelligence Response Team (IRT), previously led by Abba Kyari, appointed August 2, 2021.
Promoted to Commissioner of Police in March 2023.
Disu’s tenure at the Lagos RRS earned him recognition for operational efficiency, technology-driven policing, and improved rapid-response coordination.
Frank Mba
Frank Mba joined the Nigeria Police Academy in Kano in 1994 and graduated in 1995 as Best Cadet Inspector. His trajectory, unlike Disu’s largely operational path, leaned heavily toward public communications and strategic administration.
His notable milestones include:
Lagos State Police Public Relations Officer (PPRO) in December 2007.
Nigeria Force Public Relations Officer from February 2012 to August 2014, succeeding Moshood Jimoh.
Subsequent promotions to ACP and Area Commander.
Appointment and decoration as Deputy Inspector-General of Police in March 2025, heading the Department of Logistics and Supply.
As DIG in charge of logistics, Mba oversaw procurement, infrastructure, housing, and quartermaster operations across the Nigeria Police Force—an immensely strategic portfolio.
The Seniority Debate: Was Frank Mba Forced Out?
Public outrage intensified following reports that DIG Frank Mba would retire to make room for Disu’s elevation. Critics described it as a “daylight robbery” and evidence of ethnic bias.
However, within paramilitary and military institutions globally, it is standard practice for senior officers to retire when bypassed in favor of a junior colleague appointed to the highest command position.
Nigeria is not unique in this regard.
When officers are appointed IGP, others senior to them—whether in service years or rank—often exit the force. The same pattern occurred during previous administrations. Notably, when officers receive accelerated promotions to fulfill strategic or federal character considerations, others inevitably retire.
Indeed, there are claims that Frank Mba himself benefitted from accelerated promotions earlier in his career, including a double promotion to DIG rank during a period when representation from the South-East at that level had diminished due to retirements. While such promotions are within presidential prerogative, they underscore how political calculations can intersect with professional advancement.
Is This “Yorubanization”?
The accusation that President Tinubu prefers Yoruba appointees must be evaluated against broader national appointments and security architecture patterns.
Nigeria operates a federal character system designed to ensure equitable regional representation. However, critics argue that enforcement has been inconsistent across administrations.
That said, it is important to note that IGP appointments historically reflect presidential trust and compatibility. Security leadership demands a close working relationship between the Commander-in-Chief and the IGP.
This is not unique to Tinubu’s administration. It is a structural feature of Nigeria’s political system.
The Political Nature of the IGP Office
Every rank above Commissioner of Police inevitably carries political undertones. The higher one climbs within the NPF hierarchy, the more presidential discretion becomes influential.
The position of IGP is not solely administrative—it is strategic, political, and national-security sensitive.
Presidents typically appoint individuals they believe:
1. Share their reform agenda.
2. Have operational credibility.
3. Can implement strategic security policies effectively.
4. Are personally trusted.
Therefore, while merit and service record matter, political compatibility also plays a decisive role.
The Bigger Question: Merit vs. Sentiment
Both Tunji Disu and Frank Mba are innovative, accessible, and accomplished officers.
Some of Disu’s contemporaries remain oscillating between Commissioner of Police (CP) and Assistant Inspector-General (AIG) ranks. Similarly, many of Frank Mba’s peers are still CPs, while he rose to DIG rank.
Career progression within the Nigeria Police Force has never been strictly linear.
It is also worth recalling that when Frank Mba was promoted in previous years, other senior officers retired to create space. This is not an anomaly; it is institutional practice.
Moving Forward: Expectations for the New IGP
What matters now is performance.
Tunji Disu’s record at the Lagos Rapid Response Squad demonstrated innovation, digital coordination, and rapid-response reforms. Many observers hope he replicates that momentum nationally.
Nigeria faces complex security challenges:
Banditry
Kidnapping
Terrorism
Cybercrime
Communal conflicts
The new IGP must modernize policing tactics, invest in intelligence-led operations, strengthen inter-agency collaboration, and rebuild public trust.
If Disu succeeds, the narrative will shift from ethnic controversy to institutional reform.
Final Thoughts: Beyond Partisan Outrage
Political disagreement with the ruling party does not justify misinformation about institutional processes. The President’s authority to appoint an IGP from AIG rank or higher is legally grounded.
While emotions run high—especially in a polarized environment—it is important to remain informed about the operational norms of the Nigeria Police Force.
Every IGP appointment in Nigeria’s history has led to the retirement of officers senior to the appointee. This is not new.
The debate over equity and representation in Nigeria’s federal structure remains valid and necessary. However, conflating standard institutional practice with ethnic conspiracy risks deepening divisions.
In the end, the appointment of an IGP is both constitutional and political. The ultimate measure of legitimacy will not be ethnicity—but results.
Nigeria does not need more outrage cycles.
It needs effective policing, institutional integrity, and leadership that can write its name in gold—not in controversy, but in service to national security.
0 Comments