PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANIES AND CRIME PREVENTION
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Human history has always been punctuated with societal concern for security at both the individual and collective levels. This has particularly been the case because security affects people’s livelihood. The privatization of security has now become a global phenomenon (Hyden, 1995). This is the result of a number of factors including general human insecurity, the
globalization phenomenon, the privatization of public enterprises, the professionalization of armed and police forces,
drive for profit maximization, liberalization of the arms trade, general unending African conflict and the crashing of the
twin towers and the pentagon on the 11th of September, 2001 in United States (Holmqvist, 2005). In the
contemporary world, the privatization of security has spread throughout the world to an unprecedented level that it is
no longer possible to ignore, let alone comprehend (Howe, 1998).
The many types of modern private security outfits available today may be traced to Allan Pinkerton, who founded
Pinkerton’s security services in 1850 with the motto “we never sleep” (Schmalleger, 1995). It was also the largest of
the private firms headquartered in New York. The Pinkerton Service had a logo which was an open eye, to signify constant vigilance on its office doors. The term “private eye” is thought to have developed from the use of this logo. In
another development, Schmalleger (1995) affirmed that Henry Wells and William Fargo built their popularly known
Wells Fargo company in 1852 and supplied detective and protective services (private guard and investigator) to areas
of West of Missouri. Thus, much has changed since the early days of private security firms (private policing). Today, services are provided
for hospitals, manufacturing plants, communication industries, retirement homes, hotels, casinos, exclusive
communities and clubs. Others are nuclear storage facilities and reactors, and many other types of businesses such
as information security that aid the protection of personnel.
Following a history of private guards and security practice in Nigeria which could be traced to royalty, religion, social
class or pedigree; the practice of private security gradually attracted a deserved attention when it became
commercialized and obviously conflicted with the social contract idea which states that only the state is capable of
arrest and punishment (Kuna, 1999). Thus, it became imperative that the practice had to be regulated within the
confines of duty, definition and laws. For instance, security in the traditional Nigerian society squarely lay with the
immediate and extended families; hence any member of the family that violates any of the norms was in danger of
being ostracized by the group until reparations and necessary purification and cleansing rituals were undertaken by
the family (Igbo, 2007).
Thus, changes have taken place from the traditional Nigerian societies to the present as a result of ‘modernisation’.
These changes occasioned the encroachment of western institutions on moral standards of the society which has
implications for general life and security particularly on Nigerians. Other factors include urbanization, formal education
and capitalist economic system. As a result a range of crimes emanated quite different from what was known in the
traditional society, which may require more sophisticated security approach. Some of these crimes include murder,
theft, assault, and suicide, pick pocketing, drug abuse, counterfeiting, fraud, forgery, smuggling, unlawful possession
of dangerous weapons, prostitution, white- collar crime, advanced fee fraud (419) corruption, rape, and a host of
others which are all prevalent in modern Nigeria(Ebbe, 1981 cited in Igbo, 2007).
Thus, Ochefu and Idrees (2002), posited that, the Nupes and Gwagyis who are predominant groups in Niger state
with migrant Hausas’ prevent crimes through proper socialization of the young ones i.e application of communal
approach to socialization, instilling of the fear of pain in punishment…later, other prevention measures include the
organization of the Dogarai (local police), the Ninety (90) days cleansing fast as reparation; Others include the use of
scarecrows, charms and fetish materials and the use of Ndakogboya or Kuti (Masquerade) popularly known among the Nupes.
Also, according to Igbo (2007), the end of the civil war witnessed not only the return of old criminals to the street; but also the ‘graduation’ of new and more sophisticated ones’. This singular assertion indicates that the current state of
security network in the country may be under serious threat as crime waves continue to rise unabated.
The most recent of the threats to security in Nigeria is the emergence of kidnapping and terrorism which have been
enhanced by the widespread use of firearms by criminals. This indeed facilitated the modus operandi of these
criminals, thereby enhancing complete change in criminal activities as cases of aircraft hijacking and assassinations of prominent Nigerians and bomb explosions in various corners of the country became rampant.
In addition to earlier mentioned criminal activities, today law and order also pose serious
security challenges in the country. According to Sunday Ehindaro, the former Inspector General
of Police, “perhaps the most potent threat to national security of any country is crime”
(Dambazau, 2007: 152). This statement is also in line with the report of the Economic
Intelligence Unit (EIU) in a survey called “RISKWIRE” which concluded that,
Nigeria is an insecure environment for commercial operations. Security risk arises at three levels. The first comes
from rising violent crime (from) simple armed robbery (to) carjacking and violent attacks….Second, companies can be
subjected to direct attack or blackmail…facilities can be vandalized and staff kidnapped. Third, incidences of intercommunal violence have risen. Nigeria’s ill equipped police force . has been ineffective in stemming the crime wave.
(Dambazau, 2007: 53).
Therefore, the ineffectiveness of the Nigeria police and the concern of Nigerians for security led to the emergence of
guards and private security companies in the country to augment the activities of the security agencies and work in
line with the laid down rules and regulations. Just like the vigilante, private security companies are also an informal
arrangement to keep with the pace of rising crime rate in Nigeria.
However, as is the case in all countries, the citizens of Nigeria are highly concerned about their security and this
concern has been expressed through the growth of Private Security Companies (PSCs). The last decade has seen a
proliferation of PSCs in a country of about 140 million people (Census, 2006). The presence of these companies is
conspicuous in the premises of both private and public sector organizations. This is in spite of the fact that in both
urban and rural areas, security matters are largely in the hands of private actors than in those of the state. Thus, the
function of private security companies was handled by the Nigeria immigration service in the Federal Ministry of
Interior. Until 1st September, 2005 when the then Minister of Internal Affairs handed over all documents of private
guard companies to the Nigeria Security and Civil Defense Corps (NSCDC, 2009).
There are two principal landmarks in the regulation of PSCs in Nigeria. The first is the enactment and approval for
creation of PSCs on 15th December 1986. This law was cited as Act No 43 and consolidated under the laws of the
Federation of Nigeria 1990 in chapter 367. The second is the handover from the Nigeria immigration service to
Nigeria civil defense corps cited currently as chapter 30 in Private Guard Companies (PGC) Act (Laws of the
Federation of Nigeria, 2004). This law is specifically enacted for the “regulation and licensing of private guard
companies which must be wholly owned by Nigerians and other matters-ancillary thereto” (PGCs Act, Cap367, 1990).
Finally, the perception of ineffective policing and rising crime gave impetus to the emergence of a plethora of nonstate policing groups (Olaniyi, 2005). The state has shared its security responsibility with a variety of non-political organizations including vigilante groups, religious vigilante, ethnic militias and private security guards. Based on the above and most especially considering its growing importance, the activities of the PSCs necessarily became a subject of study. This has led the researcher to the choice of private security companies and crime prevention in Nigeria with Niger state as a case study
PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANIES AND CRIME PREVENTION