Story by Iyiola Ayomide
In recent weeks, activist-turned-politician Omoyele Sowore has launched a relentless and highly personalized campaign against the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, branding him an “illegal IGP” and laying the blame for the plight of retired police officers squarely at his doorstep. While activism is vital in any democracy, it becomes dangerous when it is misdirected, selective, and rooted in political antagonism rather than truth or principle.
At the heart of Sowore’s grievance is the tenure extension granted to IGP Egbetokun by the federal government. Citing the constitutional retirement age of 60, he argues that the IGP’s continued stay in office is illegitimate. However, this claim is both legally flawed and historically uninformed.
In 2024, the National Assembly amended the Police Act to explicitly provide a fixed four-year tenure for the Inspector-General of Police, regardless of age or years of service. This amendment was enacted to ensure leadership stability and insulate the office from the disruptions of forced retirement due to age. Section 7(6) of the Police Act (Amendment) now clearly states that the IGP is entitled to a four-year term. Legal authorities, including the Attorney-General of the Federation, have affirmed the validity of this law and its application to IGP Egbetokun’s tenure. There is, therefore, nothing “illegal” about his appointment or continued service.
Moreover, Egbetokun is not the first head of a security agency to benefit from a tenure extension. Past IGPs, including Sunday Ehindero, Mohammed Adamu, and Usman Alkali Baba, had their terms extended under similar circumstances. Military chiefs, too, have received tenure extensions, notably under former President Muhammadu Buhari. None of them was branded “illegal” by Sowore or other critics. Why, then, is Egbetokun being singled out?
The answer may lie not in law or policy but in politics. As a former presidential candidate and a self-styled revolutionary, Sowore has increasingly blurred the line between activism and political agitation. In this case, he is directing his ire at an institution rather than the actual authority responsible for policy decisions – the presidency. If Sowore believes the law is wrong, his battle should be with the lawmakers who amended it and the President who assented to it, not with a public servant implementing it.
Even more troubling is Sowore’s attempt to hold Egbetokun personally responsible for the sufferings of retired police officers under the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). This is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. The CPS was established by the Pension Reform Act of 2004, long before Egbetokun assumed his current role. The IGP neither enacted the law nor had the authority to repeal it. What he has done, however, is show empathy and leadership by setting up a committee to investigate the concerns of retired officers and explore viable reforms. He has engaged with stakeholders and openly acknowledged the hardship many retirees face. This is a constructive approach, one that recognizes the IGP’s limited powers but maximizes his influence to seek redress.
Unfortunately, Sowore’s rhetoric has gone beyond advocacy into the realm of abuse. His use of social media to hurl insults, undermine institutions, and promote distrust in lawful authority undermines democratic engagement. His prosecution under the Cybercrime Act, while controversial, is now before the courts. Due process must be allowed to take its course.
In a democracy, criticism of public office holders is both permissible and necessary. But it must be grounded in fact, guided by reason, and aimed at the right targets. When an activist deliberately misrepresents the law, shifts blame for systemic issues onto one man, and uses inflammatory language to stoke public outrage, he risks eroding the credibility of genuine advocacy.
IGP Kayode Egbetokun is a product of the system, executing the responsibilities assigned to him under the law. If there is any fault in the system, it is up to lawmakers and the executive arm of government to address it. Sowore, as a politician and supposed patriot, should direct his activism where it belongs, towards those who wield legislative and executive power, not against a public servant whose only “crime” is doing his job.
For the sake of our democracy and the integrity of public discourse, let us separate sincere activism from political grandstanding. Nigeria needs reformers, not rabble-rousers.