In recent weeks, public debate has intensified over whether the Inspector-General of Police must retire upon reaching the age of 60. To clarify the legal position, we spoke with Mogaji Busayo, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Western Eagle Security Limited, who explains the statutory framework governing the tenure of the Inspector-General of Police.
Excerpts
There has been public commentary suggesting the Inspector-General must retire at 60. Is that correct?
That interpretation does not fully reflect the current legal framework. In a constitutional democracy, the law—not speculation or social media commentary—determines the position. The relevant statutes clearly explain how the tenure of the Inspector-General of Police should be understood.
What did the law originally say about retirement in the Nigeria Police Force?
Before the amendment, Section 18(8) of the Police Act required every police officer to retire upon attaining 60 years of age or 35 years of service, whichever came first. That provision served as the general rule for officers within the Nigeria Police Force.
What changed in the law?
In 2024, the National Assembly amended the Police Act by introducing Section 18A. This provision specifically addresses the tenure of the Inspector-General of Police.
The amendment states that:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (8)… any person appointed to the office of Inspector-General of Police shall remain in office until the end of the term stipulated in the letter of appointment in line with Section 7(6) of the Act.”
What does Section 7(6) provide?
Section 7(6) clearly provides that the Inspector-General of Police shall hold office for four years. When read together with Section 18A, it establishes a fixed tenure for the office.
Why is the word “Notwithstanding” significant in this context?
In statutory interpretation, the word “notwithstanding” is very important. It indicates that the provision takes precedence over any conflicting provision within the same statute.
So, by using that term, the law makes it clear that Section 18A overrides Section 18(8) in relation to the Inspector-General of Police. In other words, the general retirement rule does not interrupt the four-year tenure of a serving Inspector-General.
There was controversy around the tenure of former IGP Kayode Egbetokun. Why?
The issue involving Kayode Egbetokun was largely based on a principle of statutory interpretation which states that a new law regulates the future, not the past.
Courts have consistently held that statutes generally do not operate retrospectively unless the law expressly states so. This principle has been affirmed in several Supreme Court decisions, including:
• Udoh v. Orthopedic Hospitals Management Board (1993)
• Orthopedic Hospitals Management Board v. Garba (2002)
• Goldmark Nig Ltd v. Ibafon Co. Ltd (2012)
Essentially, a law cannot automatically extend or alter an appointment that was made before the law came into effect unless the statute clearly provides for that.
Does that same issue arise in the present situation?
No, it does not. The key difference is timing.
Olatunji Disu was appointed after the Police (Amendment) Act 2024 had already come into force. That means his appointment falls squarely within the amended legal framework.
Because the amendment applies prospectively, there is no question of retroactive application in this case.
Does this mean the Inspector-General can serve a full four-year term even after turning 60?
Yes. By operation of the amended law, the Inspector-General is entitled to complete the four-year tenure specified under Section 7(6), regardless of whether he reaches the age of 60 during that period.
The statute is very clear on this point.
What was the broader intention behind the amendment?
The amendment was not designed to favour any individual. It was intended to strengthen the institution of the Inspector-General’s office.
Security leadership requires continuity. Reforms within policing institutions take time to implement. A fixed four-year tenure helps ensure:
• leadership continuity
• policy stability
• effective reform implementation
• strategic security planning
These are governance considerations aimed at institutional stability.
Can the Inspector-General still leave office before completing the four-year term?
Yes. The tenure is fixed but not absolute. The Inspector-General may still leave office if removed according to the law, if he resigns, or if a court of competent jurisdiction interprets the statute differently.
What should the public understand about the current legal position?
The statutory framework is straightforward:
• Section 18A overrides Section 18(8).
• Section 7(6) guarantees a four-year tenure.
• The amendment applies prospectively.
• Olatunji Disu’s appointment falls within the amended framework.
Therefore, unless a competent court decides otherwise, the Inspector-General’s tenure is legally protected for the full four-year period.
In a democracy governed by the rule of law, clarity must always prevail over conjecture. The law, as enacted by the National Assembly, speaks for itself.
