ABUJA — Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) — Olu Daramola, Olalekan Ojo and Isiaka Olagunju — have said Nigerians have a lawful right to record police officers while they are performing their duties in public spaces.

The lawyers spoke amid controversy generated by recent comments attributed to the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, who criticised a court position encouraging members of the public to record police officers in certain circumstances.

NCAA Fines RwandAir ₦15 Million Over Passenger’s Damaged Baggage

Disu had described the development as “very, very demoralizing” for the police, prompting renewed debate over whether citizens are legally permitted to film officers while on duty.

However, Daramola, in a statement on Friday, September 11, 2026, said the issue had already been addressed by the courts.

He cited the judgment of Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court in Maxwell Uwaifor v. Inspector-General of Police, which he said was delivered in March 2025.

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

He added that the judgment remained binding and subsisting.

According to Daramola, the court went beyond recognising the right of citizens to record police officers. He said the judgment also directed police officers to display visible name tags and force numbers to make them identifiable to members of the public.

Daramola further said the judgment prohibited police officers from seizing citizens’ mobile phones or deleting footage recorded by members of the public.

He linked the right to record public officials to Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.

According to him, documenting public officials while they perform their duties falls within the constitutional protection, provided the person making the recording does not interfere with the lawful duties of the police officer.

**“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.

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

Daramola also noted that recording police activities was not peculiar to Nigeria, pointing to the use of body cameras by law enforcement officers in several countries.

He argued that officers carrying out their duties lawfully should have little reason to fear being recorded.

“A police officer carrying out his lawful duties in a lawful manner has nothing to fear,” he said.

Daramola maintained that the position of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) on the matter reflected the law, adding that an administrative pronouncement could not override a subsisting court judgment.

Recordings Can Preserve Evidence — Ojo

Ojo also supported the position that citizens can record police officers while they are performing their duties.

He said such recordings could promote transparency, encourage proper conduct and preserve evidence that may subsequently be useful in investigations or disciplinary proceedings.

Ojo described recording as a form of evidence gathering and preservation, arguing that footage from members of the public had in some cases helped expose alleged misconduct by police officers.

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

The SAN added that if police officers knew their activities could be recorded, they might become more conscious of their conduct while carrying out their responsibilities.

“If the police know, as they now know, that their activities may be recorded, then they will be much more careful as to what they do in the course of discharging their duties,” Ojo said.

He, however, introduced an important caveat: citizens should consider their personal safety before attempting to record an encounter with the police.

According to Ojo, some officers could react aggressively if they discover that they are being filmed, particularly where they believe the recording 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.

He advised citizens to assess the circumstances carefully.

“Is it safe to record? 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,” Ojo said.

Olagunju Acknowledges Safety Concerns

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

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

“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 three lawyers’ positions have added to the ongoing debate over police accountability, citizens’ constitutional rights and the safety of both law enforcement officers and members of the public during encounters.

While the SANs maintain that citizens can lawfully record police officers performing their duties in public, they also stressed the importance of ensuring that such recording does not obstruct lawful police operations and that citizens exercise caution where their personal safety may be at risk.