Nigerians have a right to record the police

The Inspector-General of Police, Tunji Disu, recently expressed concern about Nigerians recording police officers while they are on duty, describing the practice as “very, very demoralising” and urging citizens not to turn officers into material for social-media skits. He raised the issue during a meeting in Abuja with the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, and members of the NBA executive committee.

The IGP’s concern about harassment and the misuse of videos is understandable. Police officers work in difficult and sometimes dangerous circumstances, and nobody should have a licence to interfere with an officer performing a legitimate operation simply because he or she has a mobile phone. But the argument becomes troubling when the police leadership appears uncomfortable with citizens exercising a legitimate right to record police activity in public.

The Federal High Court in Warri, Delta State, addressed that issue in March 2026. In a judgment delivered on March 17, Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa affirmed the constitutional right of Nigerians to record police officers performing their duties in public and ordered that officers should not harass, intimidate, arrest or seize the devices of citizens who are making such recordings. The judgment also addressed the requirement for police officers to display identification while carrying out public duties.

That is why the NBA President was right to speak up. Badejo-Okusanya did not argue that police officers have no right to privacy; she distinguished between officers performing their duties in public and officers engaged in private activities, such as eating or relaxing. She also pointed to body-worn cameras as an example of how recording can be used to promote transparency rather than undermine policing.

The difference is obvious, and the IGP’s own comparison shows why. Asking whether Nigerians would enter the NBA President’s office, film her while she worked and publish the footage is not equivalent to filming a police officer standing by a roadside and interacting with members of the public. One involves entering somebody else’s private office without permission; the other involves observing and recording an official carrying out public duties in a public place.

When a police officer stops a motorist on a public road, searches a vehicle at a checkpoint or questions somebody on the street, that officer is exercising public authority. Citizens should, therefore, be able to document what happens, provided they do not interfere with the officer’s work.

A camera can protect both sides. A citizen can preserve evidence if an officer behaves improperly, while an officer can use the same recording to disprove a false allegation. The answer is to deal with interference and misuse, not to make recording the problem.

The police leadership should also understand why people reach for their phones. Most Nigerians pull out their phones because something unusual is happening in front of them. A confrontation, an arrest, an argument, a questionable search or an apparent abuse of authority is much more likely to attract a camera than an officer directing traffic properly.

If an officer is doing his job professionally, being recorded should ordinarily be of little concern.

The same recording may even prove that the officer did nothing wrong. A police force that wants public confidence should want more accurate evidence of police-citizen encounters, not fewer witnesses.

We can draw examples from North America and Europe. Video recorded by members of the public has played an important role in documenting controversial encounters between police and civilians, while police agencies have increasingly adopted body-worn cameras to create their own records of interactions. An example is the George Floyd incident. In the United States, the use of body-worn cameras has spread rapidly, and US Justice Department policies have incorporated body-camera requirements for certain federal law-enforcement activities.

A body camera is not a magic wand. Research has found that its effects on policing and police-citizen relationships are more complicated than some advocates initially assumed. It can provide evidence, help with investigations and training, and improve transparency. But that depends on clear rules about when cameras should be switched on, how the footage is stored and when it can be released.

• 2027: Tinubu warns police against partisan conduct
• Police arrest 16 suspected robbers, cultists in nationwide crackdown
• Oyo kidnap: Monarch seeks upgrade of police post

Nigeria has already heard a senior police officer make the case for such technology. In June 2026, Deputy Inspector-General of Police Adegoke Fayoade called for the deployment of body-worn cameras for Nigerian police officers, describing them as a means of strengthening accountability, transparency and professionalism. Nigeria should be asking how to improve police recording, not how to stop citizens from recording the police.

The IGP could take a different approach. Instead of telling Nigerians that recording officers is demoralising, the police leadership could say: “Record us, but do not obstruct us. If you believe an officer has acted improperly, send the recording to a designated police accountability portal or telephone number, with the time, location and relevant details.”

A system like that would give the videos a more useful purpose. A video would no longer be just material for social-media outrage. It could become evidence in an internal investigation. It could also help honest officers defend themselves when edited or misleading videos of an encounter are posted online.

Citizens also have responsibilities. Nobody should deliberately obstruct an arrest, interfere with a search or put an officer or another person in danger simply to obtain dramatic footage. Neither should people automatically assume that a short video clip tells the entire story, because a camera can capture an important moment without capturing everything that happened before it.

Police officers also have a right to privacy. Recording an officer while he is working on a public road is different from filming him while he is off duty and eating in a private setting. The NBA President was right to distinguish between the two situations. Not every recording is the same.

But the police should also understand that public authority comes with public scrutiny. An officer exercising state power over a citizen cannot reasonably expect the encounter to be invisible simply because being watched or recorded feels uncomfortable. Public authority comes with public scrutiny.

The police are asking Nigerians to trust them. Trust grows when institutions are willing to be seen, questioned and held accountable. Asking citizens to look away will not create it.

The IGP should therefore change the emphasis of his complaint. If some Nigerians are turning police officers into entertainment content, the police can condemn that behaviour without casting suspicion on the legitimate act of documenting police conduct. If some citizens are recording officers in ways that obstruct operations, the police can enforce laws against obstruction.

What the police should not do is make citizens feel that taking out a phone to record an officer is itself an offence. The court has already affirmed the right to record police officers performing their duties in public, and the NBA President was right to defend that principle while recognising the legitimate privacy rights of officers outside their public duties.

If an officer is doing his job properly, a camera should not be the enemy. In fact, the Nigerian Police Force should want reliable records of what its officers do on the streets. Such records can protect the public, protect good officers from false allegations and help identify those who abuse their powers.

The principle is simple. Let the police record themselves. Let citizens record the police. Let the evidence speak. A police force that wants to become respected and trusted should not fear transparency; it should build its system around it.