The chairman of the Police Service Commission (PSC) has initiated an investigation into allegations of corrupt practices and land matters involving some senior officers of the Zone 7 Police Command, Abuja.

This development follows a complaint by Alhaji Abubakar Yahaya, whose residential property was demolished by a developer assisted by police officers.

According to the PSC chairman, DIG Hashimu Argungu, the investigation will focus on the roles of the officer in charge of the Legal Unit and the deputy commissioner in charge of operations.

The officers are accused of abuse of office, extortion, and gross misconduct.

The commission’s spokesperson, Ikechukwu Ani, said, “The demolition of Yahaya’s property occurred on December 19, 2024, when police officers and enforcement staff from the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, arrived at the residence. The officers allegedly threw away his property and chased his family members out.

“In addition, the enforcement unit of the High Court, led by Shamsudeen Ubandoma, collected N700,000 from Yahaya under false pretences. The money was purportedly for the policemen who accompanied Ubandoma for enforcement.”

He further explained that “on January 16, 2025, policemen accompanied by Alhaji Usman Sarki, the purported owner of the disputed plot, demolished Yahaya’s residence using trucks and bulldozers. Yahaya was arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy, trespass, and mischief.

“The petitioner claimed that he had been in possession of the plot for over 15 years without any issues. He alleged that the demolition was carried out solely on the strength of the police, led by the officer in charge of the Legal Unit.”

The PSC chairman has requested that the inspector-general of police set up a competent committee to investigate the allegations. The petitioner is seeking an investigation, sanctions against the officers involved, and compensation of N1 billion.

“The investigation is a significant step towards addressing allegations of corruption within the police force. The PSC’s commitment to transparency and accountability is evident in its efforts to investigate and sanction erring officers. The outcome of the investigation will be closely watched, as it has implications for the reputation of the police force and the administration of justice in the country,” Ani stated.

 

President Bola Tinubu has been asked to call the chairman of Police Service Commission, PSC, Hashimu Salihu Argungu, a retired Deputy Inspector-General of Police, to order over attempt to review a lawful judgement of court.

In a letter dated January 29, signed by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Terkaa Aondo, SAN, the president was asked to call him to order for allegedly meddling unlawfully in the enforcement of the judgement of the court of competent jurisdiction.

In suit number FCT/HC/CV/330/2018, Alhaji Usman Sarahi, challenged the unlawful and illegal revocation of Plot 1798 Cadastral Zone A2, Wuse District, Abuja, covered by a Certificate of Occupancy, without service of Revocation notice in line with the Land Use Act.

Upon determination of the case, the court delivered its judgment in favour of Alhaji Saraki and nullified the purported revocation and subsequent reallocation.

The court held that the purported revocation of the claimant’s right of occupancy without service of revocation notice is illegal, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

The judgement was enforced on 19/12/2024 by evicting all the occupants and on 25/12/24, one Alhaji Yahaya Abubakar and his thugs, broke back into the property against the Order of the FCT High Court.

The SAN said, in the petition to the president, “It is pertinent to note that, on the 25/12/2024, one Alhaji Abubakar Yahaya, the brother in-law to a top high ranked official of the Police Service Commission, aided by weapon-wielding thugs, criminally and forcefully broke In and entered into the property in total disrespect to the Order of Court that had evicted them. Following complaint  to the Court and the Police, on 14/1/2025, the illegal occupants were evicted from the property, and our client put back in possession.”

Alhaji Yahaya allegedly paid the sum of N700,000.00 to a staff of the execution unit of the FCT High Court to prevent the court staff from going back to the property to further evict him and his illegal occupants and thugs.

But Alhaji Yahaya, through his Counsel, Barrister Sani Abass, said the money was paid to the Court staff in error. He said, “That issue has been resolved, the money was sent in error and it has been reversed”.

Alhaji Yahaya approached the court in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/5699/2024, over the enforcement of judgment and secured an injunction to stop further construction work on the property and also petitioned the PSC, following which a panel, chaired by the chairman of the commission, DIG Argungu (rtd) is said to be conducting an investigation into the enforcement of Judgment of a Court of competent jurisdiction over a civil matter.

The senior advocate said in the petition that despite the pendency of the matter before FCT High Court, his client was invited by a letter personally signed by the chairman of the PSC to appear before a panel set up by the PSC chairman over issues relating to the Court judgment and its enforcement which are subject of Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/5699/2024 pending before FCT High Court No. 5, Maitama, presided over by Hon. Justice Mairo Nasir.

According to the senior counsel, when the Panel sat on 27/1/2025, most of the issues raised by the Panel relate to the where-abouts of the judgment creditor; how the plot was allocated and how the Judgment was obtained and enforced, which are all matters that have been decided on merit by a Court of competent jurisdiction in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/330/2018, and which also form the basis of the pending litigation in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/5699/2024.

“All efforts by counsel to make the chairman appreciate the fact that the investigation over the plot of land upon which a judgment of court subsists, Is outside the mandate of the Commission, proved abortive. In the course of the sitting on 27/1/2025, in a rather shocking and bizarre twist, the Chairman directed the Panel to pay a visit to the locus in quo for a first hand assessment of the property, and deployed several Police Vehicles and Armoured vehicle, for this purpose.”

A senior official of the PSC, Mr Ikechukwu Ani, said he is not aware of the panel. According to him, ” To the best of my knowledge, I’m not aware of such panel.”

The SAN states that his client feels intimidated by the posture and threats by the Chairman of the PSC, but he is nonetheless, uninterested in any resolution of the matter outside the Court. The SAN concludes that: “It is important to note, Sir, that It is against the hallowed principle of rule of law, which your administration Is poised to protect, for an appointee of an exalted public office to deliberately interfere in the judicial process and the cause of justice. We pray your Excellency Sir, to use your good offices to call the Chairman of the Police Service Commission to order and to cause him to align himself with the mandate for which the Commission was established.”

The Police Service Commission (PSC) has reiterated that it has no constitutional authority to appoint or remove the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, amid growing speculations over his elongated tenure.

In a statement released on Monday, PSC spokespersonm Ikechukwu Ani, emphasised that the commission’s directive regarding the retirement of senior officers does not affect the IGP, as his appointment was strictly a presidential decision based on the advice of the Council.

“The commission does not have the constitutional powers to determine the appointment or exit of the Inspector-General of Police,” Ani stated.

The clarification came in response to concerns raised after the PSC directed officers who have either turned 60 or completed 35 years of service to proceed on immediate retirement from the Police Force. Given that Egbetokun turned 60 last year, speculation mounted over whether the directive applied to him or not.

However, Ani dismissed such assumptions, making it clear that the PSC’s recent decision applies only to officers within its jurisdiction.

“The law is clear on this matter,” he said. “The Inspector-General of Police is appointed by the President, and his removal follows due process as outlined by the constitution.”

He further explained that the PSC’s recent meeting focused on the regularisation of appointment dates for Cadet ASPs and Inspector Force entrants, which has no bearing on the office of the IGP.

“The commission at its 1st extraordinary meeting of the 6th management board on Friday, January 31, 2025, only considered and made a decision on the regularisation of the date of first appointment of CADET ASPs/Inspector Force Entrants. This has nothing to do with the Inspector-General of Police or his office,” Ani clarified.

Stressing the PSC’s commitment to its constitutional duties, Ani affirmed that the commission is content with its current powers and is not seeking additional authority beyond what the law provides.

“The commission wishes to state that it is comfortable with the size of the powers bestowed upon it by the constitution and is not interested in seeking additional powers that are not backed by law,” he stated.

Despite recent controversies, Ani reaffirmed that the PSC maintains a strong and complementary working relationship with the IGP in the overall interest of the Nigeria Police Force.

The Police Service Commission has ordered the immediate retirement of all senior police officers who have either exceeded 35 years in service or are above the age of 60.

The directive follows controversy over the tenure of the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun after he clocked 60 years.

The Police and the Attorney General of the Federation have, however, said his continued stay in office is lawful.

A statement on Friday by the PSC’s Head of Press and Public Relations, Ikechukwu Ani, noted that the commission reviewed its earlier stance from the 24th plenary meeting in September 2017, which allowed force entrants to use their date of enlistment instead of their initial appointment date.

However, Ani said the PSC has now reversed this decision, citing its inconsistency with Public Service Rule No. 020908 (i & ii), which mandates retirement upon reaching 35 years in service or the age of 60.

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 concluded that the said decision in its intent and purpose contradicted the principle of the merger of service in the public service and it violates of
Public Service Rule No 020908 ( i & ii), which provides for retirement on attainment of 35 years in service or 60 years of age.”

Ani added that the directive has been formally communicated to the Inspector General of Police for immediate implementation.

“The Commission Chairman, DIG Hashimu Argungu, retd, presided over the extraordinary meeting and had Justice Adamu Paul Galumje, retired Justice of the Supreme Court and Hon Commissioner representing the Judiciary; DIG Taiwo Lakanu rtd, fdc, Honourable Commissioner representing the Police and Chief Onyemuchi Nnamani, Secretary to the Commission in attendance.

“The commission’s decision has been conveyed to the Inspector General of Police for implementation, ” the statement added.

The Police Service Commission has directed the immediate retirement of all senior police officers who have either exceeded 35 years in service or are above 60 years.

The directive follows controversy on the tenure extension of the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, after he clocked 60 years.

A statement by the PSC’s Head of Press and Public Relations, Ikechukwu Ani, noted that the Commission reviewed its earlier stance from the 24th plenary meeting in September 2017, which allowed force entrants to use their date of enlistment instead of their initial appointment date.

However, Ani said the PSC had now reversed its decision, citing its inconsistency with Public Service Rule No. 020908 (i & ii), which mandates retirement upon reaching 35 years in service or the age of 60.

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 concluded that the said decision

 in its intent and purpose contradicted the principle of the merger of service in the Public service and it violates of Public Service Rule No 020908 ( i & ii) which provides for retirement on attainment of 35 years in service or 60 years of age.

The PSC’s decision came amid ongoing legal debates surrounding the tenure extension of the IGP, whose continued stay in office has sparked controversy.

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Kunle Adegoke, said while the move might not explicitly violate any constitutional provisions, its legality remained subject to judicial interpretation.

He 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.

“Where a specific tenure is provided by law, it may not be within the power of the appointor 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,” he stated.

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 aspect of society from the military or paramilitary institutions existing in the country.”

He maintained that testing the matter in court would be beneficial, as it would help establish a clear legal precedent on the issue.

In his comment, a former chairman, Section of Public Interest and Development Law, Nigerian Bar Association, Monday Ubani, SAN, said the extension of the IG’s tenure was backed by an Act of Parliament, which supersedes the civil service rule in the hierarchy of laws.

Ubani said, “I am speaking from the angle of the law. The police act itself defined the powers of the IGP and its tenure. They amended it. It says that the four-year tenure runs irrespective of your age.

“In other words, even if you have attained 60 years, by that act itself, you can now extend your tenure beyond the years you have clocked biologically. So that is the amendment that took place. “

Ubani further emphasized that in any legal conflict between the civil service rules and an Act of Parliament, the latter takes precedence.

He, however, urged that public discourse and democratic debate should be encouraged on the matter.

“I wouldn’t like a situation where you publicly arrest someone like Sowore because he expressed his view. For the fact that he says you are an illegal I.G. does not invalidate the law. It shows that we are in democracy.”

Another senior lawyer, Ifeday Adedipe, SAN, also said Egbetokun’s tenure extension was legal.

He referenced a law signed by former President Muhammadu Buhari in 2020, which he believed the current administration was applying correctly.

“To the extent that the law was properly passed by the National Assembly and validly assented to by the executive, then the extension is valid. There is nothing whimsical or dictatorial about it,” he said.

Besides, he noted that the practice of appointing and replacing IGs within short timeframes disrupts continuity and weakens the efficiency of the force.

“One of the things I worry about is this high turnover of Inspectors General of Police—one year, two and a half years, six months. The police will not develop a strong culture if leadership keeps changing so frequently,” he said.

He cited an example from the United States, where judicial and executive institutions are often associated with long-serving leadership, such as the “Warren Court” or the “Burger Court,” emphasizing that longevity in leadership fosters consistency and a recognizable administrative legacy.

Adedipe urged the government to prioritize institutional stability by allowing key officials, such as the IGP, to serve longer terms.

“If someone is appointed Inspector General of Police, let him serve for five or six years. That way, we can assess his leadership properly, rather than removing people arbitrarily to satisfy political interests,” he said

The Police Service Commission (PSC) has approved the dismissal and prosecution of two Assistant Superintendents of Police (ASP) for misconduct, dishonesty, corruption, sabotage and acts unbecoming of public officers.

PSC also approved the reduction in ranks of six other officers on related offences.

The demoted officers include two Superintendents of Police whose rank were reduced to the rank of Deputy Superintendents, one Deputy Superintendent, reduced to the rank of Assistant Superintendent and three Assistant Superintendents now Inspectors.

According to a statement by PSC spokesperson Ikechukwu Ani, these decisions were highpoints of the concluding stages of the Commission’s 2nd Plenary Meeting which held at its Corporate Headquarters in Jabi, Abuja.

“The commission also approved a punishment of severe reprimand on ten senior police officers found guilty of unauthorised disclosure of official secret, dishonesty, sabotage and conduct unbecoming of senior police officers.

”Another nine senior officers were given punishment of reprimand while a deputy commissioner of police was found not guilty and exonerated.”

The statement added that, “A letter of warning was served on an assistant superintendent of police, even as the commission had earlier treated recommendations on police promotions and promoted several senior police officers.

”These include eleven Commissioners of Police to the next rank of Assistant Inspectors General of Police; 16 Deputy Commissioners of police to commissioners.”