Invisible policing: A new approach to Nigeria’s security concerns

Security and insecurity in Nigeria, have been at the centre of global discourse in the last two decades. While Nigeria has one of Africa’s strongest military, contributing significantly to several peace-building efforts across the continent – Mali (2013), The Gambia (2017), Darfur-Sudan (2007-2020), among others – it has however failed to guarantee security and peace at home. It raises the question of why internal peace and security are difficult for a country that has successfully achieved them in other nations.

Since the beginning of the 4th republic, Nigeria has experienced serious security challenges ranging from communal clashes to terrorism and increasing crime rates across the country. These crimes include kidnapping, terrorism, rape, cybercrime, bribery, and corruption, which has often led to increased police and military activity in affected regions. Even local communities resort to forming vigilante groups to ensure their safety. The state governments across Nigeria as well – mostly along regional line – have sought to develop security teams such as Amotekun in the South-West, Ebube Agu in the South-East, Operation Delta Hawk in the South-South and the various vigilante groups in the North. However, crime persists across the entire regions of the country. Why has these several endeavours been unable to curb security concerns across the country? This brings to mind, “Security beyond the visible – Invisible Policing”.

Global strategies for addressing security and policing concerns, particularly in the context like Nigeria, have usually been focused on strong deterrence to provide security and curb crime, overlooking the subtle yet powerful strategy – policing the mind. Policing goes beyond the physical manifestation of force, patrol vehicles, numerous checkpoints or surveillance infrastructure, but also includes the ability to psychologically curb crime and provide security. The question then becomes: how does one create security and curb crime psychologically?

This can be achieved by building a system that reduces the perception of insecurity while reinforcing the certainty of consequences. Such a system prioritises justice over mere legality and ensures that laws are enforced consistently, without bias. When a state develops a strong capacity to detect crime and enforce punishment swiftly and fairly, citizens begin to internalise the expectation of consequences. This produces a behavioural shift where individuals comply with the law not merely because of physical enforcement, but because of a deeply embedded awareness of accountability. Over time, this consciousness is reinforced through consistent governance, institutional reliability, and public trust.

Interestingly, such structures are not new to African societies. In many precolonial African communities, and early colonial Nigerian communities, the symbolic use of objects, such as tying red and black cloth to items or places   served as psychological deterrents. The message was clear – violating these spaces would bring consequences. This system worked not merely because of mystical beliefs, but because communities trusted in the certainty of justice. Actions had consequences, and this fostered a society where deviance was minimal. Even today, in the heart of Ibadan, one can still see sentences written on walls in Yoruba – “To sibi ko sofo”, meaning “You will perish if you urinate here”. These too, are policing, though in forms that are more psychological than physical.

What these examples suggest is that the mind is the first site for regulating criminal behaviour. For instance, many religious adherents avoid “sin” due to belief in divine surveillance and punishment. Where deterrence is credible and enforcement is certain, criminal behaviour tends to decline. The implication is that effective policing requires not only physical capacity but also psychological legitimacy.

To operationalise this in Nigeria, enforcement must become more consistent, visible in outcome, and rooted in the country’s social realities. In contexts where enforcement is weak or uneven, stronger punitive signalling may become necessary to restore deterrence. This does not merely concern the severity of punishment, but the certainty and immediacy with which it is applied. Across all categories of crime, the law must function without bias. No special treatment for the rich or influential. The persistence of high-profile cases involving political office holders, including governors and legislators, undermines this credibility and weakens deterrence across the country.

Currently, traffic laws are violated without consequence, public spaces are misused without sanction, kidnapping and ransom payments occur without detection, while fraud and cybercrime persist with limited deterrence. In such an environment, the absence of consequences becomes normalised, reinforcing the perception that rules can be ignored without cost. This weakens the psychological foundations of law and order.

To truly curb criminality, consequences must follow all actions without consideration of class. In China, anti-corruption campaigns under Xi Jinping targeted both high-ranking officials and lower-level actors, signalling that enforcement would be comprehensive. By 2021, millions of officials had been investigated and sanctioned. Beyond the numbers, the broader effect was psychological: the expectation of consequences became embedded across different levels of society. This form of signalling creates what may be described as an invisible policing structure, a system in which the anticipation of enforcement constrains behaviour even in the absence of physical policing.

Nigeria’s current security dilemma requires a shift from policing that is primarily visible to one that is both visible and internalised. Laws must function predictably, and enforcement must be consistent and evident. Only then do citizens internalise consequences, shaping behaviour at scale. Ultimately, Nigeria’s security challenge is not only institutional but cognitive. Sustainable order depends on systems that influence belief and expectation. Invisible policing must complement conventional policing, ensuring that accountability is both enforced externally and embedded psychologically within society.