Human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong has replied the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, over his opposition to the widespread filming of police officers, asserting that Nigerians should be free to document encounters with police officers carrying out their official duties in public.
Key Highlights:
- Inibehe Effiong defended Nigerians’ right to record police officers on duty in public.
- IGP Olatunji Disu warned against using police recordings mainly for social media content.
- Effiong cited Section 39 of the Constitution and a 2026 court ruling supporting citizens’ right to film police.
- The court said officers should not harass, arrest or seize devices from people recording them.
- The debate centres on police morale versus accountability and citizens’ protection.
Effiong’s position followed comments by Disu during a meeting with the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) officials in Abuja, where the police chief described the increasing practice of recording officers as “very, very demoralising” and warned against turning policemen into social media content.
Disu said the practice of recording police officers can be allowed when they are performing their duties in public, but warned that members of the public should exercise restraint and not use the footage primarily for entertainment or social media content.
“We are not saying they can’t exercise their rights of recording officers in public places while doing their jobs, but they should put restraints and not turn our police officers into content for their skit or anything,” Disu said.
The police chief also questioned whether the public would accept police officers entering their offices or courts to record them, while highlighting the difficult conditions under which police personnel operate, including assignments on highways and in isolated locations.
However, speaking on Channels Television’s Morning Brief on Friday, Effiong pushed back against the Disu’s position, arguing that citizens have a constitutional basis for recording police officers while they perform their public duties.
Effiong cited Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which protects freedom of expression, and referenced a March 2026 Federal High Court judgment in Warri, Delta State.
In the judgment, Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa affirmed citizens’ right to record police officers carrying out their duties in public.
The court also held that police officers should not harass, intimidate, arrest or seize the devices of citizens simply because they are recording them.
The case was filed by a lawyer, Maxwell Uwaifo, following a stop-and-search encounter with police officers. The court also ordered officers conducting public operations to display visible names and force numbers.
Effiong’s intervention has reignited the debate over police filming, with Nigerians divided over whether recording officers during official duties amounts to harassment or serves as an important tool for accountability.
Supporters of the practice argue that recordings can provide evidence when disputes arise between citizens and law enforcement officers, while critics have raised concerns about the potential misuse of footage for social media content.
The debate has also generated reactions X (formally Twitter) with @Ostiiv3 arguing that civilians may need to document police encounters because officers should ideally have their own body cameras and dash cameras to provide independent records of interactions.
“In a complex society as ours, we are supposed to have a police that shouldn’t approach anyone without a live body cam and a live dash cam. We have to do things ourselves as civilians. Where then are our resources being used?”
Read also:
- Nigerians Demand Tough Punishment As Police Arrest 27-Year-Old Woman Over Fake OPAY Shutdown Notice
- Adamawa APC Governorship Candidate Condemns Dzangola Attack, Calls For Urgent Security Action
- US Air Force Delivers Equipment To Nigerian Military
@Tee9ine2 questioned why surveillance cameras should be viewed differently from citizens recording police officers, pointing out that surveillance systems in other countries continuously capture people’s activities in public and private establishments.
“They don’t want to talk about the surveillance cameras in other countries. The surveillance cameras capture everything, everything. Even when you’re eating somewhere. Will you say those cameras should be removed??!!!”
@ObiomaMbeoji argued that police officers need stronger oversight because of complaints of harassment, adding that body cameras could provide greater accountability if officers are required to wear them while on duty.
“Police officers should be kept in check, we’ve been harassed enough! Which is why I intend to propose a bill for police to wear body cams while on duty when I get into the House Of Reps.”
Meanwhile, @Unclcle_dips advised motorists to install cameras in their vehicles to document encounters with police, road safety officials and VIO personnel.
The controversy has placed police morale and public accountability on opposite sides of the police filming argument, with Disu warning against the misuse of recordings and critics insisting that documenting police encounters can help protect citizens and provide evidence when disputes occur.I
