House Members Should be Blamed For the Commotion-Police PRO

In a recent interview granted punch ,the Police Public Relation Officer,Emmanuel Ojukwu has absolved the police of any wrong doing in the fracas that took place in the house of assembly when they were alledged to have prevented the Speaker Tambuwal from gaining access into the chambers,saying their actions were legal.

Do you still insist the action of policemen at the National Assembly a few weeks ago was professional and justified?


It is professional, it is justified, it is a matter of the law. We did what we had to do because that is what the law permits.

What did you expect of the lawmakers when confronted by policemen at the National Assembly premises?

We expected them to obey the police because Nigeria is a country ruled by law. We expected them to follow the rule and obey what the police asked them to do and allow themselves to be screened in line with the law.

Are you saying the lawmakers’ refusal to be screened led to the commotion?

They refused to be screened, they were riotous.

Why was the leadership of the National Assembly not informed about the intelligence report that led to the deployment of policemen?

In intelligence, there is what is called ‘need to know’ and there is what is called ‘need to share’. You share intelligence with those who may help you in what you are doing, but if somebody is going to be affected by your intelligence, as in the present case, you don’t need to share the intelligence; otherwise, somebody may conceal or destroy the intelligence. As I said earlier, the police acted in line with the law.

So in this case, you think it was not necessary to share intelligence with the NASS leadership?

We took the best position, the best action judging by the time.

Were the police right in locking out Tambuwal and other lawmakers while allowing his deputy and the Senate President to access the National Assembly premises?

All the police did was to screen members who were entering the premises and that is allowed by law to prevent breakdown of law and order. All the police did was to preserve law and order, all we did was a preventive act. We were not targeting Tambuwal, we were targeting thugs to make sure the National Assembly was protected. It was not personal.

You once said those arrested were thugs. What is the level of investigation now?

It is still ongoing.

Was the Inspector-General of Police right to withdraw Tambuwal’s security details?

The matter is in court.

How do you respond to criticisms that the IG is interpreting the law and taking over the work of the Attorney-General?

All the police did was to enforce the law; the issue of Tambuwal, whether he is Speaker or not, is in court and we don’t comment on a matter before the court. The duty of the IG is to enforce the law and that is what he has done.

But the court has not ruled that Tambuwal is no longer the speaker, so why did the IG refuse to recognise him as speaker when the case has not been decided?

The IG does not interpret the law, the job of the IG is to enforce the law and that is what he has done. It is the court that interprets the law and what the IG has done is to enforce the law as stipulated and on the issue of Tambuwal, it is before the court and we do not comment on it.

Prof. Wole Soyinka described the scaling of the fence by reps members as their finest hour. What is your own view of their action?

Prof. Soyinka has his views, our view is that our job is to protect the law and that is what we have done.

Some described the action of the police as an assault on democracy. Do you agree with this view?

The action of the police was to protect democracy, we must protect our democracy from the hands of thugs, we must protect our national edifice, the National Assembly.

Critics believe the IG may have pandered to the wishes of the Presidency and that he could have taken a more mature decision in the circumstances he found himself. What is your take on this?

The IG is not a politician, he is a thoroughbred, professional police officer who knows his onions. We do our work in line with the law. The IG is not political.

But many believed he was actually appointed to be used for dirty political jobs. Do you agree with this?

The IG is qualified for his position, he has two degrees. He has been in the Nigeria Police since 1984, he had served in almost every part of this country. He is qualified, he is articulate, he is learned, he has a broad heart, he is the right person for the moment. He was appointed based on merit not through any personal lobbying. The IG was appointed to serve Nigerians.

Will the police be impartial during the 2015 elections because there are fears that the Force may have taken sides in view of the incident at the National Assembly?

The police is always impartial, we have always been impartial. But we know that losers will always vilify the police because it is the agency of government they can vilify at will. There is no problem; we have a record of excellent performance in elections. In past elections, the Nigeria Police was adjudged creditably. International groups have already adjudged our preparations for the 2015 elections as adequate.

What assurances will you give Nigerians that the police will be impartial in the 2015 elections, going by the apprehension that the Force may be working for the Peoples Democratic Party?

There is no apprehension, because I am also a Nigerian and I read the temperature of elections. People are concerned, they want to have good elections, and all hands have to be on deck. I want to assure Nigerians that the Nigeria Police will do its job in line with the law. Nobody will be disappointed. Everybody involved in the elections — the voters, the candidates, the umpire — should play the game in line with the rules. The police will live up to their own billing.