EDITORIAL: The Sowore Question and the Burden on the Police

The recurring confrontations between Omoyele Sowore and the Nigeria Police Force under the leadership of former Inspector-General Kayode Egbetokun present more than a personality clash. They expose a fundamental tension in Nigeria’s democracy: how the state responds to dissent.

In any constitutional democracy, the right to protest is not a privilege granted at the convenience of government; it is a protected freedom. Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees citizens the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Yet, in practice, the exercise of these rights has often brought citizens into confrontation with law enforcement authorities.

Mr Sowore, activist and perennial government critic, has consistently tested the boundaries of civic engagement through organised protests and outspoken commentary on governance failures, corruption, and insecurity.

His supporters view him as a dogged advocate of accountability. His critics see him as provocative and disruptive. Whatever side one takes, his activism falls within a broader tradition of dissent that is essential to democratic life.

The police, on the other hand, are constitutionally empowered to maintain public order and national security. Under Mr Egbetokun’s tenure, the Force operated in an atmosphere of heightened insecurity — terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, and communal violence — all of which understandably place enormous pressure on law enforcement institutions. The state has a duty to prevent breakdown of law and order. That duty, however, must be discharged within the confines of the law.

The repeated arrests and confrontations involving Mr Sowore raised troubling questions. Were law enforcement actions guided strictly by clear threats to public safety, or did they reflect an institutional intolerance of dissent? Democracies are measured not by how they treat praise-singers, but by how they handle critics.

Nigeria’s recent history adds further context. The #EndSARS protests left deep scars and exposed widespread mistrust between citizens and the police. In that fragile post-#EndSARS environment, every encounter between activists and law enforcement carries symbolic weight. It either reassures citizens that reforms are taking root or reinforces perceptions of continuity in heavy-handed policing.

The responsibility for building trust does not rest solely with the police. Activists must also ensure that protests remain peaceful and lawful. Civil disobedience, while historically significant, carries consequences and must be strategically deployed. Yet the greater burden lies with state institutions. Power demands restraint. Authority must be tempered by constitutional fidelity.

The tenure of Mr Egbetokun offered an opportunity to recalibrate the police’s relationship with civil society. That opportunity, in the view of many observers, was only partially realised. Beyond individual cases, what Nigeria urgently requires are clear, transparent protocols for managing protests; robust training in rights-based policing; accountability mechanisms that command public confidence; and an unambiguous commitment to safeguarding civil liberties.

The friction between Mr Sowore and the police should not be dismissed as routine political drama.

It is emblematic of a democracy still negotiating its boundaries. If dissent is persistently securitised, civic space will shrink. If public order is neglected, instability will fester. The challenge is balance — and balance requires institutional maturity.

Nigeria must choose the path of constitutionalism. A confident democracy does not fear its critics. It engages them, protects their rights, and relies on the strength of its institutions rather than the force of its coercive powers.
The health of our republic depends on getting this balance right.