The enactment of the Anambra State Homeland Security Law, 2025, by the State House of Assembly represents a lukewarm attempt at enhancing security in the state. Its introduction, a full three years into Governor Soludo’s administration—an era marked by unprecedented killings and kidnappings—raises critical concerns about both its timing and potential effectiveness.
Although the law purports to combat crime and improve public safety, a closer analysis exposes deep-seated flaws. These issues make the law outdated, excessively punitive, economically damaging, and susceptible to abuse.
More importantly, any meaningful approach to security requires fairness and accountability. Building a secure environment starts with establishing a fair and functional system of law and order that ensures consequences for all wrongdoings. Under Governor Soludo, Anambra State has witnessed a growing collapse of this system, from questionable practices in the election of town union presidents to the licensing of “agberos” (touts) under the guise of revenue collection. These practices have fueled rising cult clashes, exacerbated by aggressive and unorthodox revenue collection methods. Additionally, Soludo’s handling of local government elections and his disregard for Supreme Court judgments concerning local government resources highlight a leadership distracted from critical security challenges. Instead, the focus has been on burial laws and how Igwes confer chieftaincy titles—hardly the priorities for addressing the state’s urgent security concerns.
Below are key observations on the new law:
1. Conflict with the Nigerian Constitution
The Homeland Security Law grants the Agunechemba security outfit quasi-policing powers, including patrolling, arrests, and investigations. These duties, however, fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Nigeria Police Force as outlined in the Nigerian Constitution. This creates a clear legal conflict.
Additionally, Clause 5(5) permits security personnel to enter private residences without a warrant, violating constitutional protections of privacy (Section 37) and property rights (Section 44). Such provisions undermine the rule of law and expose citizens to arbitrary invasions.
2. Unrealistic and Overbearing Provisions
The law imposes excessive and impractical demands on citizens:
Monthly Security Reports from Community Leaders (Clause 13): Requiring community leaders to file detailed monthly reports is not only impractical but also diverts them from their core duties.
Obligations on Landlords and Hotel Operators (Clause 14): Landlords and hoteliers are required to collect and verify detailed personal information from tenants and guests, in addition to installing surveillance cameras. These requirements impose heavy financial and administrative burdens, particularly on small businesses and rural communities.
3. Economic Implications
The law’s harsh penalties, such as a ₦5 million fine for non-compliant landlords, risk stifling investment in sectors like real estate and hospitality. Furthermore, Clause 15’s provision for property forfeiture based on mere allegations of criminal links creates uncertainty and fear, discouraging property ownership and development. Forfeiture should only follow proven legal processes, not unsubstantiated claims.
These measures risk making Anambra appear hostile to investment, which could drive entrepreneurs and tourists to more welcoming states.
4. Risk of Abuse and Political Exploitation
The expansive powers granted to the Agunechemba outfit and the Governor’s supervisory committee create significant risks of abuse. For example, Clauses 5 and 15 authorize detention, property searches, and asset seizures without adequate safeguards. These powers could be exploited for extortion or political repression.
Ambiguous terms like “questionable character” (Clause 5(4)) provide loopholes for arbitrary profiling and wrongful arrests. Additionally, Clauses 15 and 19 allow for the closure of businesses or places of worship without judicial oversight, further raising concerns about fairness and impartiality. These provisions are particularly worrisome in an election year, where they could be weaponized against political opponents.
5. Disregard for Cultural Sensitivities
Clause 18 criminalizes certain traditional practices involving charms, which are not inherently linked to criminal behavior. This blanket ban alienates local communities and disrespects cultural traditions, potentially reducing public cooperation with the law’s objectives.
6. Weak Oversight and Accountability Mechanisms
The law lacks robust provisions for transparency and accountability. While the Attorney General has some oversight authority (Clause 17), this is insufficient to prevent abuse by Agunechemba operatives. Without stronger safeguards, citizens remain vulnerable to injustices.
7. Political Overreach and Timing
The timing of the law’s introduction raises suspicions of political motives. By granting extensive control of the Agunechemba outfit to the Governor, the law risks becoming a tool for suppressing dissent and intimidating opposition voices. Anambra’s vibrant political landscape must not be undermined under the guise of security enforcement.
Recommendations for Improvement
To address these issues and create an effective law, the following steps are essential:
Align with Constitutional Provisions: Limit Agunechemba’s role to intelligence gathering and community engagement, avoiding conflicts with federal policing powers.
Simplify Compliance Requirements: Make the obligations for landlords, hotels, and community leaders more practical and less costly.
Promote Economic Growth: Revise penalties and compliance measures to encourage, rather than discourage, business activity and investment.
Prevent Abuse: Establish independent oversight bodies to monitor Agunechemba’s operations, and replace vague terms like “questionable character” with clear, objective criteria.
Respect Cultural Practices: Work with local communities to ensure cultural traditions are preserved while addressing legitimate security concerns.
Ensure Non-Partisan Implementation: Introduce safeguards to prevent the politicization of the Agunechemba security outfit.
In Conclusion
The Anambra State Homeland Security Law, 2025, while ambitious in its intent, is deeply flawed in its design and execution. As it stands, the law jeopardizes constitutional rights, harms the economy, and erodes public trust. Only a more inclusive, balanced, and transparent approach can achieve the sustainable security the state desperately needs.
Anambra’s security challenges demand innovative, fair, and constitutionally sound solutions—ones that can truly foster development and stability. These must be realized, with or without Governor Soludo at the helm.
