Sie sind auf Seite 1von 56

ADDRESSING REAL AND PERCEIVED THREATS TO

FARMER/HERDER RELATION IN NIGERIA USING COP


AS THE TOOL FOR PROMOTING COOPERATION AND
CO-EXISTENCE
CP AUSTIN IWAR
CP BAYELSA STATE COMMAND
 Presentation Format
 Introduction
 Perceived threats
 Real threats
 Understanding Community Policing
 Distinguishing features of Community Policing
 Gombe Experience in handling Farmer-herder crisis
 Recommendations to Government of Gombe State
 Building Structures, Systems, and Process
 Renewed Community Policing Activities
 Introduction – Problematic reality
 Crisis between farmers and herders has been on for several years
 The crises springs from the demand for land for farming &
grazing, & results in frictions between farmers & herders as they
both explore land for its resources for their agricultural needs.
 clashes have resulted in needless destruction of lives & properties
with long-term direct impact on the socio-economic wellbeing of
affected areas with another indirect consequence on those
depending on affected persons/areas for their agricultural needs.
 the economic fortune of the States becomes affected as revenue
that would have been generated become not forthcoming &
additional resources are spent in restoring peace. Indeed the exact
total of socio-economic loss of such clashes can never be
accurately quantified.
 Introduction
 Of factors attributed to these migrations, the most obvious being
the intensification of drought and desertification, & climate
change leading to unregulated migrations. This means herders
reach farming areas when they are least expected, during farming
and harvesting season.
 Although the migration of herders has created strong social &
economic bonds between many communities, it has also caused
serious conflicts, the history of which is always fresh in our
collective memory.
 Three types of conflicts. Conflicts caused by international
migration of herders; conflicts caused by intensification of
transnational migrations among Chad, Niger, Nigeria &
Cameroun; conflicts caused by recent migration & settlement of
herders in some states.
 Perceived threats
 Loss of Farmland: Farmers are predominantly scared of the
possibility of losing their farmlands to herders whom they suspect
are out to deprive them of the right and use of their means of
livelihood. This fear gives birth to hostilities.
 Loss of Grazing Land: In like manner, herders exhibit perceived
fears of losing their grazing lands to farmers who they accuse of
constantly expanding their territories. In resistance to this fear,
conflicts emerge.
 Destruction of Crops: Farmers exhibit high levels of perceived
fear of losing their farm produce from activities of herdsmen &
thereby resulting in hostilities.
 Loss of Livestock: While farmers live in perceived fear of losing
their farm produce, herder equally exhibit high levels of fear of
losing their livestock to rustling and hostilities by non-herders.
 Perceived threats
 Theft of Crops/Livestock: Farmers & herders both live in the
perceived fear of theft & destruction of their crops/livestock &
in order to prevent it from happening, they embark on all
manner of measures.
 Perceived Laws/Regulations Specifically Targeted at them:
Farmers & herders alike perceive certain laws/regulations as
threats to their livelihood and exhibit defiance and or hostilities
to protect their interests.
 Insensitivity of Authorities: Farmers & herders perceive
certain government policies & neglect as deliberate insensitivity
to their plight & in response put up resistance and hostilities.
 Real threats
 Ignorance of Laws & Regulations on Transhumance: ignorance of
the applicable laws & regulations in agriculture is one of the real threat
to peaceful coexistence between farmers and herders.
 Weak & poor Law Enforcement: threat to lasting peace in
farmers/herders crisis lies in existence of laws/regulations are either
outdated or less effective. Thus, enforcement is weak & thereby allowing
misbehavior & conflict.
 Mutual Suspicion: Farmers & herdsmen have lived in mutual suspicion
of each other perpetually with open distrust of one another. This is
largely responsible for failed attempts to bring them together on one
table for fruitful discussions & lasting solution to the lingering crisis. \
 Inadequate Government Support/Intervention: inadequate
support/intervention of the Government, such as incentives, subsidy,
marking of farming/grazing reserves, etc. to enable them ply their trade.
 Real threats
 Shrinking Arable Land: real threat to cooperation & peaceful
coexistence between farmers & herders is the increasing dwindling
availability of arable land for farming & grazing in the midst of
explosion in its demand. This includes climate change &
desertification.
 Blurring of Migration Routes: Both internal & transnational
routes; sometimes grazing areas that have been marked are lost &
cannot be identified or not maintained by authorities;
 Expansion of Communities: The expansion of areas cultivated by
farmers; expansion families & communities necessitate the need for
more farm lands;
 Increased Cattle Herd: An increase in cattle herds, which has
deepened the competition for scarce natural resources; sometimes
herders encroach on private farm lands, away from designated
grazing areas destroying crops;
 Real threats
 Politicization of Conflict: threat to cooperation & peaceful
coexistence between farmers & herders lies in the deliberate
politicization of the crisis where some persons chose to give it
political definition.
 Bias in Handling Crisis: Farmers, herders & other
stakeholders have blamed the aged long farmers-herders crisis
on injustice occasioned by bias handling of the crisis by
relevant authorities resulting in renewed tensions.
 Perpetrators Escape Punishment: threat to peaceful
cooperation & coexistence between farmers & herders in
hinged on the fact that perpetrators often times go unpunished
and thereby giving birth to a new circle of crisis.
 Real threats
 Leadership Corruption and Greed:
diversion/misappropriation of resources meant for providing
enabling environment for farmers & herders to ply their trades
in peace with one another. An example is the deliberate
diversion of funds budgeted for creating migration camps,
demarcation of farming & grazing areas as well as resources
meant for rehabilitation of crisis affected areas.
 Regulation of Agric sector: whilst there are regulations for
pastoralists, we yet to regulate other sectors of agriculture; e.g.
there is a national livestock transformation plan but crop
farming transformation plan.
 Land use Act: Poor implementation of land use act.
 Understanding Community Policing
 We have reached a situation where something has to be done by
all parties involved – herders, farmers, Government officials
and security agencies.
 The conflicts are multi-faceted. Farmers want the land for
agriculture; business people want the land for investments;
herders want to graze their animals.
 Our communities have been devastated & become hopeless
areas to live. Our ability to prevent these crimes will depend
heavily on our ability to help reshape community life, at least in
most of the communities we are experiencing farmer-herder
crises. Unfortunately for us, the number of communities
affected are not only increasing, but their problems are so
profound.
 Community Policing Approach
 focuses on crime & social disorder through the delivery of
police services that includes aspects of traditional law
enforcement, as well as prevention, problem solving,
community engagement, & partnerships. It requires police &
citizens to join together as partners in the course of both
identifying & effectively addressing these issues.
 Community Policing as a proactive strategy offers a much more
holistic approach to dealing with farmer-herder conflicts.
 Basic elements include:
 Service Delivery, Partnership, Problem Solving,
Empowerment, Accountability
 Distinguishing Features of Community Policing
 role of the police officer extends beyond law enforcement officer
involved solely in crime control. The police are called upon to enforce
the law, to prevent crime, promote public order, resolve conflict,
enhance police-community relations, and render general service and
assistance to the public; A police officer therefore requires wide ranging
skills;
 Community policing moves away from the incident-driven style of
traditional policing by following a more problem-oriented approach.
 Creative police responses to the underlying causes of problems are also
introduced. Police are no longer restricted to law enforcement or visible
patrolling. A variety of strategies and tactics are introduced in order to
prevent and combat crime.
 Community policing accepts that the police cannot solve crime &
disorder problems on their own. All are considered equal partners that
work together to make communities safer places to live, work & raise
children;
 Distinguishing Features of Community Policing
 Community consultation & partnerships should develop so that they
enhance the ability of the police to combat & prevent crime. In this way
also, the communities will be able to monitor, evaluate & advise the
police.
 Community policing necessitates development & change in the
traditional structure & culture of police services. One of the biggest
changes relates to the empowerment of employees. This is facilitated
when decision-making, innovation, & creativity are encouraged at all
levels of the police organisation.
 Gombe State Experience
 The risk factors mentioned here were found to exist & persist in
Gombe state prior to my being posted to the state in 2015. All
these created massive security problems leading to destructions of
farmlands, properties, cattle & deaths running into billions of
naira;
 Most of these conflicts were based on competition for grazing
lands, water & farmers encroaching on gazette grazing areas &
stock routes.
 The migration of these herdsmen into Gombe state usually leads
to violence, killings and mass destruction of villages, &
inhabitants fleeing their homes & constituting internally
displaced persons.
 In 2015 the state experienced destruction of communities in
Yamaltu-Deba Local Government. One of such conflicts led to the
shooting & wounding of a police officer that was deployed to
maintain peace.
 Gombe State Experience
 While all these conflicts & clashes were occurring, findings showed that
Gombe state was rich & heavily endowed with massive agricultural &
pastoral economy. In Gombe state pastoralism generates considerable
wealth & economic interdependence between herdsmen & farmers.
 With around 1.2 million head of cattle, 1.9 million sheep and 2.6 million
goats, pastoralism contributes a huge percentage to the state’s gross
domestic product (GDP), & also contributes to the livelihoods of a large
percentage of the population.
 the traditional pastoral farming system in Gombe State contributes
significantly to socio-economic development & the growth of livestock
in the state and the country.
 Gombe State Experience
 The state also has seven (7) gazetted grazing reserves across five
local government areas – Akko (2), Billiri, Dukku, Kwami, and
Yamaltu-Deba (2). In addition, there are 34 proposed, surveyed
community grazing areas across ten (10) local government
areas.
 Nine (9) of the grazing areas were heavily or partially
encroached. This created problems for the government & the
police. It is a crime to encroach on gazetted grazing reserves.
Those found guilty were arrested and charged to court.
 Mapping of all migration routes and pastoralists settlement
areas;
 Mapping of areas of prevalent areas clashes.
 Recommendations To the Government
 Although the state has a Ministry for Animal Husbandry &
Nomadic Affairs, the Nomadic Affairs Department saddled with
responsibility of tackling herders problems was weak.
 the Police made some far-reaching recommendations to the
Government that were to be implemented by the Ministry & other
security agencies as measures to prevent farmer-herder clashes.
These included:
 Government to compile comprehensive data on livestock in the
State showing their locations, population, movement & specific
needs to aid accurate planning;
 Government to immediately appoint Reserve Rangers that will
take care of cattle routes, grazing reserves, grazing ponds,
monitoring & policing of these aspects. The Ranger will amongst
other things be responsible for:
 Recommendations To the Government
 Anticipate migrations to prevent violence related to herders in
the state;
 Work with appointed staff from the Animal Husbandry and
Nomadic Affairs, in partnership with representatives of herders
(Miyette Allah etc.) on transhumance routes to monitor
itinerary & inform in advance local authorities that herders are
passing through the state;
 Ensuring that marked transhumance routes are not encroached
by farmers,& cattle resting areas are maintained in order to slow
down migration through the state;
 Recommendations To the Government
 The immediate appointment of Reserve Settlement Officers
in accordance with Grazing Reserves Law CAP 62 LFN 1965
that will be responsible for the preservation, granting of access,
census of herders and their herds accommodated amongst
others.
 The Ministry of Animal Husbandry and Nomadic Affairs should
work with herders & farmers to mark transhumance routes &
monitoring of seasonal movements.
 Government to ensure that all grazing areas & ponds have the
full complement of veterinary clinics to attend to herds as they
converge,
 The Government should evolve means of adopting modern
farming & grazing techniques to reduce conflicts,
 Recommendations To the Government
 The Government to consider urgently the establishment of a
Committee or Commission made up of representatives of all
stakeholders charged with responsibilities of preventing conflicts
& resolving any that may arise & specifically the following:
 Government (Ministry of Agriculture/Animal Resources) should
regulate, enforce laws, empower conflict resolution committees to
do their work, etc.
 Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN)
should educate their members on the need to avoid conflicts by
staying away from farms & farm produce, taking the law into their
own hands, etc.
 Farmers’ Association should educate members to avoid
encroaching on stock routes, adopt modern farming techniques
that produce high yields in short time, harvest their produce
within good time, etc
 Police & other security agencies will be responsible for ensuring
that there is security and safety in these areas.
 Recommendations To the Government
 Community leaders and relevant authorities should enlighten their
subjects on the need to avoid actions that will breach the peace.
 Farmers, pastoralists and indeed persons who deliberately cause
conflicts through their actions or inactions should be made to face
the full weight of the laws.
 The Ministry of Animal Husbandry & Nomadic Affairs should
generate data on indigenous herds & their sizes to allow for easy
notice of immigrants.
 Government to ensure that provisions of the Grazing Reserves Law
CAP 62 LFN1965 are implemented by the Ministry of Animal
Husbandry & Nomadic Affairs,
 Government to ensure that the provision of the ECOWAS Decision
A/DEC.5/10/98 Relating to Regulation on Transhumance are
implemented by the Ministry of Animal Husbandry and Nomadic
Affairs.
 Recommendations To the Government
 Relevant Government agency should adequately mark the
suitability of the grazing reserves & ensure that they are
ecologically conducive for livestock & acceptable to herders.
 Relevant Government agency should unblock or create new cattle
routes, Dams and cattle resting points.
 Government should work with Local Governments to carry out
surveys of all farmlands in the state and provide titles to them.
This will help define each farm or community hectares and thus
reduce encroachment;
 Government should complete the survey & gazette of proposed
community grazing reserves;
 Adequate deployment of health services along transhumance
routes, and in every big cattle market;
 Recommendations To the Government
 Ministry to monitor livestock migration to improve knowledge
(itinerary, size of herds, concentration areas etc.);
 Government to empower standing crisis response or conflict
management committee or team to facilitate dialogue between
government, traditional rulers, farmers, pastoralists and resolve
disputes in accordance with the ECOWAS Decision A/DEC.5/10/98
Relating to Regulation on Transhumance.
 Security agencies should collaborate with relevant stakeholders and
increase their patrols and surveillance on grazing reserves,
transhumance routs, farm areas, etc. to prevent crimes.
 Building Structures, Systems and Processes
 The place to start is to look at the structures, systems and
processes in place to tackle these problems.
 A new Director for Nomadic Affairs was appointed to work
with the Police Commissioner to design the broad
operational systems and processes. Other structures
developed include:
 Deputy Director – Grazing Reserve and Settlement
Scheme: Amongst other responsibilities include – range
reseeding of grass and legumes; conduct range surveys, range
mapping, range inventory and planning; multiplication of
grasses and legumes seeds as fodder for livestock; plan,
design and establish range development;
 Building Structures, Systems and Processes
 Deputy Director – Stock Route and Water Development:
stock water development for livestock watering points, small
dams; maintenance of existing boreholes, concrete wells and
earth dams, identification, retracing, demarcation,
documentation and surveying of stock routes etc.,
 Deputy Director – Nomadic Affairs: establishment of
development programmes related to grazing reserve such as ,
nomadic schools, markets, veterinary clinics, dispensaries;
provision of extension services in grazing reserves to the
nomads through workshops and seminars; resolving conflicts
in the grazing reserve and stock routes between farmers and
herders etc.;
 Building Structures, Systems and Processes
 Assistant Director – Grazing Reserve
 Assistant Director – Settlement Scheme
 Assistant Director - Water Development
 Assistant Director – Stock Route
 Assistant Director – Nomadic Welfare
 Assistant Director – Conflict resolution
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 Renewed Community Policing Activities
 With these structures on ground we embarked on a number of
activities predicated on community policing principles and aimed at
reducing the conflicts. These included:
 Community Engagement activities: The police in collaboration
with the Ministry facilitated several community engagement sessions
with leaderships of nomads and farmers aimed at developing
strategies to tackle problems and prevent anticipated conflicts.
Community Policing as a strategy promotes mutual understanding
and respect through town hall meetings where all stakeholders
contribute to security and safety of the community.
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 Security and safety Sensitization and Awareness:
Through Community Policing, stakeholders in
farmers/herders crisis were exposed to security and safety
sensitization and awareness on how to avoid issues capable
of breaching the peace and how to prevent crimes in the
community. Migrating herders were constantly sensitised to
start migration after harvest season, while farmers were
encouraged to harvest their crops as soon as possible.
 Ownership of Solution: Our community Policing
intervention gave stakeholders a sense of ownership of
solutions to problems and therefore improved commitment
and sacrifice to make it work.
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 Census Of Local Herdsmen/Farmers To Fish Out Any
Foreign Intruders: Community Policing helps farmers and
herders to better acquaint with one another and thereby
enabling them to easily and immediately notice foreign
intruders in their midst which will reduce conflicts between
them.
 Setting up of Empowered Conflict Resolution
Committee: Conflict Resolution Committees existing in
local Government areas were strengthened. Under
Community Policing, farmers/herders crisis are better
prevented and resolved through standing committees made-
up of representatives of all sides setup to serve as
arbiter/respondent to conflicts.
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 Joint Livestock/Farm Patrols: Joint patrol teams was set up
making up of all security agencies, government officials and
representatives of farmers and herders organisations.
Community Policing partnerships approach to resolving
farmers/herders crisis will create joint efforts such as patrols
and surveillance to prevent crisis and promote peaceful
cooperation and coexistence.
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 Community policing can be a veritable tool for promoting
cooperation and co-existence amongst farmers and herd= and
thus reduce and in future eliminate crisis and violent conflicts
that has bedevilled this country for some time. The Gombe state
experience facilitated and driven by the Police Command in
Gombe is a classic example of how this can be achieved. With the
right governance structures in both Police, communities and
government department, the state witnessed massive
improvements in relationship between farmers and herders.
 Renewed Community Policing activities
 The effectiveness in community policing is in the fact that it
mobilises community against crime and criminality by using the
resources available to the police and the community. In addition,
it goes to the root cause of crime and disorder in partnership with
the community and other agencies through problem solving. It
therefore activates the community as a source of assistance and
information for the police. In Gombe, we were able to deal with
farmer-herder crisis through effective consultation and
partnership with all stakeholders, improve delivery of police
services to the Gombe people, promote joint problem
identification and solving and ensured much more accountability
and transparency.
 The End
Community policing is both a philosophy and organizational
strategy to more effectively achieve the objectives of democratic
policing
 Community Policing focuses on crime & social disorder through
 the delivery of police services that includes aspects of traditional
law enforcement, as well as prevention, problem solving,
community engagement, & partnerships.

 The Community Policing model balances reactive responses to


calls for service with proactive problem-solving centered on the
causes of crime and disorder.
 Community Policing requires police & citizens to join together as
partners in the course of both identifying & effectively addressing
these issues.
 Characteristics of Community Policing
 Policing is Essentially Proactive
 The underlying causes of crime, incidents & public complaints
are analyzed & identified;
 Rather than simply reacting to the incidence of crime, anti-
social behavior & other sources of public complaint, the police
adopt a systematic & integrated problem-solving approach with
a view to reducing & preventing the such incidents;
 Perception & actuality are treated with equal seriousness (e.g.
the ‘fear of crime’; public perception of police integrity &
competence);
 All police personnel & departments are involved in the
problem-solving process, contributing ideas & designing
initiatives for more effective policing
 Policing involves Community Consultation,
Cooperation and Interdependency
 The police participate with the public at large in
identifying & prioritizing community needs;
 The police and community work in partnership to
devise & implement agreed solutions to problems;
 The community actively engages in the policing role
through volunteer schemes, initiating neighbourhood
support networks & augmenting police patrol
activities.
 Policing involves Multi-Agency Collaboration
 The Police recognize that no statutory (or voluntary)
body can make a meaningful impact on social
problems if it acts in isolation;
 The police liaise & work together with other statutory
agencies & voluntary organizations in addressing
crime & other disturbances to public tranquility.
 Policing is Accountable
 Police managers are open & accountable about
policies, strategies, operations & decisions affecting
the community;
 All police personnel are accountable for their
professional & personal standards & for their
treatment of citizens;
 Policing effectiveness is monitored, evaluated & open
to scrutiny;
 Citizens with a grievance against the police have a
means of redress.
 Policing is both Visible and Accessible
 patrol officers are assigned permanently to small areas or zones
(usually called ‘beats’) with delegated responsibility for policing
that area;
 High visibility patrols are conducted, ordinarily on foot, to interact
with the public, gain the confidence & cooperation of citizens, &
develop local knowledge;
 The aim of patrol activity is to be preventive & provide public
reassurance;
 Patrolling must be directed & focused on clear objectives, not
aimless and undirected;
 The demeanour of patrol officers is such that citizens will feel able
to seek police assistance.
 Policing is about Providing Quality of Service
 Standards of service delivery are measured;
 Testing objectives are set for operational performance
& public satisfaction;
 The police develop a culture of service excellence.
 Community Policing Principles and Values
 The NPF Community Policing Model is based upon the
following key principles and values:
 Relies upon active partnership between the police and the
community;
 Ensures the police view their primary role as the provision of
quality service to the community.
 Entails that the police adopt a problem-solving approach to
their work;
 Requires that the Police involve the community in deciding
policing priorities
 Community policing embraces the following values
 Respect for and protection of human rights;
 Transparency and openness in relation to activities and relationships
within and outside the police organization;
 Demonstrable commitment at all times to deliver the best possible
service;
 Empowerment of all police personnel to make appropriate decisions and
thereby facilitate a speedy delivery of quality service;
 Willingness to seek for, listen to and act upon public opinion relating to
policing priorities;
 Accountability, where the police are properly answerable for what they
do, and citizens with a genuine sense of grievance against the police have
an effective means of redress;
 Ensure that citizens with a grievance against the police have effective
communication channels and redress.
 Summary of Key Principles:
 Be visible & accessible to the public;
 Know, & be known by, the public;
 Engage, mobilize & partner with communities;
 Listen to communities’ concerns;
 Respond to communities’ needs;
 Respect & protect the rights of all community members; &
 Be accountable for their actions & the outcome of those
actions.
 Benefits of Community Policing
Community-specific benefits
 the mobilisation & empowerment of communities to
identify & respond to concerns;
 a reduction in problems & issues of concern as they are
prioritised & addressed;
 an improved local, physical & social environment;
 an increase in positive community attitudes towards police;
 active participation of the community in crime prevention;
and
 reduced fear of crime.
Police-specific benefits
 an improved police-community relationship;
CHANGING OUR ATTITUDES & BEHAVIOURS SO THAT WE CAN
DELIVER A BETTER SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC
 an improved community perception of police 'legitimacy';
INCREASING PUBLIC TRUST, CONFIDENCE & SATISFACTION IN
POLICE PERFORMANCE
 an increase in officer satisfaction with their work. IMPROVING
CAPACITY OF POLICE TO DELIVER REQUIRED SERVICES
 CREATING A CULTURE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE
 Community support for supplementing or obtaining more police
resources;
Shared benefits
 a decreased potential for police-citizen conflict;
 a reduction in crime rates;
 a better flow of information between the police & the
community, and;
 better implementation of crime prevention & crime control
activities, as a result of both parties working together towards
shared goals.
 Better appreciation of the constraints & problems facing the
police
 Prioritization of services & the more appropriate allocation
of available resources
 Design /Implementation Process
 US Govt. efforts in Kaduna: training over 200 constables as
community policing officers & given bicycles to engage with
communities & do problem solving;
 2003 - DFID (SJG) & MacArthur Foundation efforts - facilitation
of a study tour to UK & US to understudy community policing;
 Development of COP project team with mandate:
 To facilitate the development of community policing throughout
Nigeria; and
 To examine the policies, strategies, structures & organization of
the Nigeria Police, to ensure that the applicable principles & core
values of community policing are enshrined in the professional
performance, ethics & codes of conduct of the Nigeria Police.
 Development of COP Implementation elements:
1. Manage & deliver awareness, sensitization &
information sharing campaign on community policing;
2. Implement community policing training for officers in
the States;
3. Examine & develop current organizational structures
to drive community policing;
4. Examine & develop the current training &
development function;
5. Develop an intelligence-led policing style, including
new technology and science; and
6. Examine laws, police processes & procedures.
 COP further reinforced by Govt. white paper on Presidential
Committee on Police Reform 2008
 Recommendation 5.26 (i-iv):
 (i) “There is need to adapt community policing to suit Nigeria’s
peculiarities. Government should formulate a Community Policing
Policy and Framework for the country, taking into account our
cultural and political environment”
 (ii) ‘all police officers should undergo training in the basic
philosophy and practice of community policing”.
 (iii) The principle of community policing should be included in the
curricular of all police training institutions”
 (iv) “The police should establish effective police-community
linkages from the lowest to the highest levels to ensure the
implementation of crime prevention strategies and policing
priorities of the various communities”.
 Success Factors of first phase:
 Community policing works; development of partnership btw. the
police & communities helped to strengthen understanding &
support for crime & community safety; work in pilot sites witnessed
substantial improvements in police – community relationship;
 The piloting of Community Safety Partnership in Gwagwalada in
the FCT informed the process of developing a national strategy for
crime prevention & community safety, by providing appropriate
methodologies & grass-roots structures drawn from the
communities;
 In areas piloted, service delivery improved; partnership working
increased due to increased trust, confidence & communication
between the police & communities;
 Joint problem-solving activities took place & security issues became
everybody’s business & not just the police;
 Improved management capacity for DPOs who were the main change
agents to manage change – improved leadership & ownership of the
reform agenda;
 Various training & development workshops for stakeholders proved
the importance of problem solving capacity of stakeholders;
sensitization workshops changed attitudes & behaviour of personnel;
 involvement of community leaders in the implementation of
community policing, the identification of local problems & joint
problem solving contributed significantly to local ownership &
support;
 establishment of the Department of Community Policing in the
Ministry of Police Affairs further strengthened government
commitment to the programme;
 the role of civil society participation showed the critical & central
role they can play & the value of much broader engagement;
 Challenges of first phase:
 The lack of a national policy or legislation institutionalising
community policing as a philosophy of policing remains critical to
police reform & development;
 Many police officers did not see community policing as a policing
philosophy & strategy but more as an add-on to police work;
institutional resistance;
 Lack of organizational restructuring to institutionalize
community policing; no operational tools, policies, guidelines,
new processes & procedures; non-democratic structuring of local
governance; entrenched law enforcement structures
 Police divisions as primary implementers – have weak structures &
poor definition of roles & resps.; partnership unsustainable
 implementation focused on some strategic aspects of community
policing, neglecting the philosophical aspects;
 The successes in community were mostly based on individual
interest & commitment rather than organizational commitment;
 The Way Forward
 The need for organizational change – key to institutionalising
community policing – to be led by IGP & Management;
 For community policing to be institutionalised key changes
MUST take place – structural, cultural, strategic & management
style changes;
 IGP to set up teams to evaluate the entire police structures to be
aligned with COP;
 A programme on workforce modernisation to be initiated;
 FHQ has to set the standard guidelines, policies & frameworks
for all aspects of community policing
 The bulk of work done by J4A programme to be
institutionalised & replicated to all police stations;
 The NPF Integrated Intelligence Model earlier developed &
approved by a former IGP need to be implemented;
 The need to situate CPs, DPOs as change agents at the State
Command level; both to be given performance targets;
 CPs to be trained in change management; DPOs to be trained
in divisional management within the context of community
policing;
 CPDs to perform the role of training, sensitization & awareness
of police personnel;
 Establishment of a robust performance management system at
FHQ;
END