State Police Bill Passed on ‘Shaky Foundation’, Says Reps Deputy Minority Leader Dasuki

By Nafiu Muhammad Lema

The Deputy Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Hon. Abdussamad Dasuki, has criticised the passage of the State Police Constitutional Amendment Bill, alleging that the House violated its own rules by approving the legislation without proper clause-by-clause consideration.

Speaking during an appearance on Trust TV’s News Hour, Dasuki said the Minority Caucus supports the establishment of state police but opposed the manner in which the constitutional amendment was passed.

According to him, the bill, which was introduced on July 14, 2026, was referred to the House Committee on Constitutional Review after passing its first and second readings. He said the minority caucus subsequently engaged constitutional lawyers and other experts who identified several areas requiring amendments.

Dasuki explained that the caucus proposed extensive changes, including conducting a public hearing to allow stakeholders to contribute to the bill and providing additional statutory allocations to states to enable them to effectively fund state police operations.

He argued that many states lack the financial capacity to sustain state police, making federal financial support essential if the reform is to succeed.

The lawmaker accused the House leadership of denying members the opportunity to present or debate the proposed amendments during the consideration of the bill.

He maintained that the House Standing Orders require constitutional amendment bills to undergo clause-by-clause consideration in the Committee of the Whole but alleged that the bill was passed immediately after only its title was read.

Dasuki further claimed that the Minority Leader was prevented from raising a point of order before the presiding officer struck the gavel to announce the bill’s passage.

He warned that the process had created a “shaky foundation” for the proposed state police system and predicted that the legislation could face legal challenges.

Responding to questions on whether the Speaker and the majority had sidelined the opposition, Dasuki said discussions had earlier been held with the presiding officers, who assured the minority that its proposed amendments would be considered.

However, he said the minority was ultimately not given the opportunity to move the amendments before the bill was passed through a voice vote.

Addressing claims that the opposition was divided because not all minority lawmakers staged a walkout, Dasuki clarified that the walkout occurred only after the voice vote had been taken, leaving no further opportunity to participate in the process.

He also criticised what he described as the growing trend of rushing major legislation through the National Assembly.

Citing the Tax Reform Law and the Electoral Act, Dasuki argued that hurried lawmaking often results in drafting errors that later require corrective amendments.

He specifically referenced Section 63(2) of the Electoral Act, which he said gives polling unit presiding officers undue discretion in reporting election results, describing it as an example of flawed legislation that could have been avoided through more thorough legislative scrutiny.