IGP Under Fire As SANs Insist Nigerians Can Record Police Officers

Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Olu Daramola, Olalekan Ojo and Isiaka Olagunju, have said Nigerians have the legal right to record police officers while they are carrying out their duties in public spaces.

The lawyers were reacting to recent comments by the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, who had criticised a court decision supporting citizens’ right to record police officers, describing the development as demoralising to the force.

According to Ireporter Online, the SANs offered different perspectives on the issue, with Daramola citing an existing Federal High Court judgment while Ojo and Olagunju acknowledged the importance of recordings in promoting transparency but warned citizens to prioritise their safety.

Daramola, in a statement on Friday, September 11, 2026, referred to the judgment delivered by Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa in the case of Maxwell Uwaifor v. Inspector-General of Police.

He said the ruling established that Nigerians could record police officers performing their duties in public and remained binding.

“The law as it stands today is that Nigerians have the right to record police officers on duty in public spaces,” Daramola said.

According to him, the judgment also directed police officers to display visible name tags and force numbers to enable members of the public to identify them.

He added that the ruling prohibited police officers from seizing citizens’ mobile phones or deleting recordings made by members of the public.

Daramola argued that the court’s position was consistent with Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.

He, however, noted that citizens must not interfere with or obstruct officers from performing their lawful duties while making recordings.

“The judgment cannot be faulted going by Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information, which covers documenting public officials,” he said.

“The only limitation is that you cannot obstruct or prevent a police officer from performing his lawful duties.”

Daramola also noted that the practice of documenting police activities was not peculiar to Nigeria, pointing out that officers in several countries use body cameras while on duty.

He maintained that an officer carrying out lawful duties should have no reason to fear being recorded.

Ojo similarly supported the position of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), arguing that allowing citizens to record police officers could promote transparency, encourage professionalism and preserve evidence of alleged misconduct.

He said recordings could also serve as valuable evidence in investigations and disciplinary proceedings against officers accused of wrongdoing.

“Recording in Nigeria today, in my view, also constitutes a form of evidence gathering and preservation,” Ojo said.

The SAN argued that police officers could become more conscious of their conduct if they knew their activities could be documented by members of the public.

He said recordings could help establish wrongdoing in cases where officers might otherwise deny allegations against them.

However, Ojo cautioned citizens against putting themselves in danger simply because they wanted to record police activities.

He said some officers could react aggressively after discovering that they were being filmed, particularly where they believed the footage could expose them to disciplinary action.

“I have seen cases where police officers, upon discovering that they were being recorded, got angry and decided to do the unthinkable and the unspeakable,” he said.

Ojo advised citizens to assess the situation and determine whether it was safe to record before bringing out their phones.

“If it is safe to record, go ahead and record. If it is not safe, you are the only one there. I will advise you not to record, because if you are caught, anything can happen,” he said.

Olagunju also acknowledged that the IGP could have concerns regarding the safety and privacy of police officers.

However, he argued that such concerns should not prevent citizens from documenting the activities of police officers or other public officials, particularly where there are allegations of misconduct or dereliction of duty.

“The IG may be right to some extent because of privacy and safety of the police officers. However, in some circumstances, recording a police officer or any other public officer who is derelict in his or her duty should also be encouraged,” Olagunju said.

The lawyers’ positions come amid renewed debate over the rights of Nigerians to document police activities and the need to balance transparency and accountability with the safety of both officers and members of the public.