ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

By Gloria Ikibah

The Department of State Services (DSS) has backed ongoing efforts to establish a dedicated Security Trust Fund for the agency but is seeking key amendments to the proposed legislation, including the removal of provisions allowing foreign funding of security operations.

The Service also called for greater clarity on funding arrangements and proposed adjustments to the composition of the governing board that will oversee the fund if the Bill is eventually passed into law.

The recommendations were presented during a public hearing convened by the House of Representatives Committee on National Security and Intelligence in Abuja on Thursday.

Lawmakers examined three separate pieces of legislation, among them the Bill seeking to establish the Department of State Services Security Trust Fund and another proposing the creation of a Strategic Intelligence Management Institute.

While expressing support for the Trust Fund initiative, the DSS maintained that certain sections of the Bill require refinement to ensure the proposed framework aligns with national security priorities and operational realities.

The Service argued that a dedicated funding mechanism will help address longstanding financial constraints affecting intelligence and security operations. It noted that the fund will provide a more predictable and sustainable source of financing for intelligence gathering, counter-terrorism activities and other critical security responsibilities.

According to the DSS, the arrangement will also make it easier to procure modern operational equipment, enhance personnel training and improve the agency’s ability to respond swiftly to emerging security threats. It further observed that the fund could reduce bureaucratic delays often associated with the conventional budget process.

On the proposed Strategic Intelligence Management Institute, the DSS warned that the institution’s mandate could overlap with that of an existing intelligence training establishment. The agency advised lawmakers to clearly define the institute’s responsibilities to avoid duplication and unnecessary expenditure.

The Service suggested that the proposed institute can play a more specialised role by concentrating on external intelligence functions, thereby complementing rather than replicating existing structures within the country’s intelligence architecture.

The presentation stated: “The Bill for an Act to establish the Department of State Services Trust Fund proposes the creation of a dedicated DSS Security Trust Fund aimed at ensuring stable and flexible financing for intelligence gathering, counterterrorism efforts, and broader national security operations.

“The Fund is designed to facilitate the acquisition of modern operational equipment, enhance training, and enable swift responses to emerging security challenges, while also minimizing delays often associated with conventional budgetary procedures and safeguarding the confidentiality required for sensitive activities. It is further intended to guarantee the availability of prompt funding during emergencies such as terrorism incidents, civil unrest, and other crises”.

While supporting the overall objective of the piece of legislation, the Service recommended several amendments.
It first proposed shortening the title of the Bill by removing the word “Security,” arguing that it was unnecessary.

According to the presentation, the title should read:
“A BILL FOR AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE SERVICES TRUST FUND, TO PROVIDE FOR ITS MANAGEMENT, FUNDING, AND UTILIZATION TO ENHANCE NATIONAL SECURITY OPERATIONS; AND FOR RELATED MATTERS.”

The DSS also proposed consequential amendments to Sections 17 and 18 of the Bill, alongside a review of the explanatory memorandum to align with the proposed new title.

A major concern raised by the Service centred on the funding structure of the proposed Trust Fund. It expressed reservations about provisions that grant the National Assembly discretion to determine annual contributions, warning that such an arrangement could lead to uncertainty in the fund’s financing.

The agency further noted that the Bill does not clearly spell out the level of contributions expected from either the Federal Government or state governments, creating potential ambiguities in implementation.

In its submission, the DSS stated that “a fixed percentage or clearly defined funding formula would provide greater certainty while still allowing the National Assembly to review such allocations through legislative amendments.”

The Service also strongly opposed a provision permitting contributions from international organisations to the Trust Fund.

According to the DSS, foreign funding of security operations carries significant risks and could undermine the independence of intelligence activities. It maintained that “foreign funding could expose sensitive intelligence operations to external influence and compromise national security”.

The presentation stated: “Furthermore, Section 3(d), which permits grants, donations, and endowments from international organizations, should be expunged.

“Allowing foreign funding for a security-related Trust Fund raises serious concerns relating to sovereignty, operational confidentiality, and institutional independence. International funding arrangements may impose reporting and disclosure obligations capable of compromising sensitive security operations, including intelligence methods, procurement processes, and deployment strategies. There is also a risk that foreign funding may introduce external influence over domestic security priorities, which may not always align with Nigeria’s specific security realities, including insurgency, banditry, and kidnapping.”

It consequently proposed that Section 3 be amended so that the Fund would receive grants, donations and endowments only from local organisations.

The Service also sought changes to the composition of the governing board.

It noted that the proposed board lacked mandatory legal expertise and questioned the inclusion of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, describing it as a voluntary association without statutory backing.

Instead, the DSS proposed that state representation should not be tied to the forum and recommended that the Nigerian Bar Association nominate a representative with expertise in national security and human rights.

It further recommended that the Secretary of the Board should be appointed by the President and must be a serving or retired officer not below the rank of Assistant Director who is also a legal practitioner with at least 10 years post-call experience.

The Service also observed that the Bill did not provide procedures for the resignation or removal of board members, including the chairman.

It therefore proposed the insertion of a new subsection allowing members to resign by giving one month’s written notice to the President and another amendment empowering the President to remove the chairman or any board member for misconduct, gross incompetence, inability to perform official duties or any other sufficient cause.

Despite the recommendations, the DSS urged lawmakers to pass the Bill.

According to the presentation: “The Bill represents a significant and commendable effort to strengthen the operational capacity of the Service through sustainable funding mechanisms. It is, therefore, in the best interest of national security that the Bill be passed into law.”

On the second Bill establishing the Strategic Intelligence Management Institute, the DSS warned that the proposal substantially overlapped with the National Institute for Security Studies established under the National Institute for Security Studies (Establishment) Act, 2019.

The Service said both institutions would perform almost identical functions by providing strategic and specialised training for intelligence and security personnel as well as public officials.

It observed that while the objectives and functions were largely similar, the proposed Institute should instead be tailored to complement the existing legal framework governing Nigeria’s intelligence agencies.

The presentation stated that the Institute should focus on external intelligence in line with the mandate of the National Intelligence Agency under the National Security Agencies Act.

According to the DSS, “the design and functions of the proposed Institute should be refocused to serve as a specialised training and capacity-building hub specifically oriented towards external intelligence, foreign intelligence operations, and international intelligence cooperation. This would ensure clear differentiation from the National Institute for Security Studies, which already provides generalised strategic security training.”

It added that such a restructuring would eliminate institutional duplication, strengthen clarity of mandates and support the National Intelligence Agency in carrying out its statutory responsibility for Nigeria’s external security and international intelligence cooperation.

Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on National Security and Intelligence, Hon. Ahmed Satomi said the three bills before the National Assembly are designed to strengthen the operational capacity of the Department of State Services (DSS) through sustainable funding, professional intelligence training and indigenous research and technological development.

Satomi described them as complementary measures aimed at positioning Nigeria’s premier domestic intelligence agency to respond more effectively to evolving security challenges.

According to him, the proposed legislations seek to address three critical areas of the country’s intelligence architecture by providing sustainable funding for the DSS, improving the professionalisation of intelligence managers and building indigenous capacity in intelligence technology, cyber security and strategic analysis.

“These Bills are interlinked. One addresses funding, the second addresses professional training and coordination, and the third addresses indigenous capacity and technology. Together, they aim to position our intelligence agencies to better protect Nigerians and Nigeria’s national interest,” he said.

The bills under consideration are the Department of State Services Trust Fund Bill (HB.2178), the Strategic Intelligence Management Institute Bill (HB.2589), and the DSS Research and Development Institute Bill (HB.2716).

Satomi explained that the public hearing was convened pursuant to Order 12 of the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives and Section 88(2) of the 1999 Constitution to obtain memoranda and expert opinions from stakeholders, security professionals, civil society organisations and members of the public before the bills are considered further.

He described public hearings as an essential part of the legislative process, stressing that effective laws must reflect the views of the people they are intended to serve.

“Legislation is not an event; it is a process. And this Public Hearing is the most democratic part of that process. The Bills before us seek to strengthen funding, build professional capacity, and enhance indigenous research capacity within our premier domestic security agency. No law made in isolation of the people it is meant to serve can stand the test of time. That is why you are here,” he said.

The committee chairman urged stakeholders to keep their submissions factual, concise and focused on improving the proposed legislations.

“I therefore instruct that all presentations must be factual, concise, and devoid of personal attacks. It is expected that contributions should focus on how these Bills will enhance national security, protect citizens’ rights, and improve service delivery, while avoiding issues outside the scope of the Bills,” he said.

He assured participants that the committee would carefully consider all credible recommendations before presenting its report to the House.

“I wish to assure you all that your inputs will be treated with the seriousness they deserve and the Committee’s final report to the House will reflect the consensus and credible recommendations that emerge from today,” he said.

Satomi also reaffirmed the committee’s commitment to transparent and inclusive lawmaking, noting that national security requires the collective efforts of both government and citizens.

“I assure all members of the public who are taking part in this Hearing Meeting that this Committee is committed to law-making that is open, transparent, and responsive. I commend you for your interest and participation. National security is too important to be left to government alone. It requires the vigilance and partnership of all citizens,” he added.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Abbas Tajudeen, stressed that national security remains the most critical pillar for Nigeria’s survival and development, describing it as the foundation upon which all other sectors depend.

According to him, the hearing was particularly significant because it focused on national security, which he described as fundamental to the survival and development of the country.

Addressing participants at the hearing, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, represented by the House Leader, Rep. Julius Ihonvbere, underscored the critical role of security in national development.

He observed that security challenges are far more than ordinary governance issues, as they have a direct impact on the lives, freedoms and aspirations of Nigerians.

According to him, sustainable progress in key sectors such as the economy, education, healthcare and democratic governance would remain difficult to achieve if citizens continue to live in an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

Abbas also reaffirmed the commitment of the 10th House of Representatives to an inclusive legislative process, describing public hearings as vital platforms for enriching legislation through expert contributions and stakeholder engagement.

He stressed that the country’s evolving security challenges require more than conventional responses, noting that long-term investment in intelligence gathering, innovation and institutional capacity is essential to addressing emerging threats.

The Speaker pointed to growing concerns such as terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, cybercrime and transnational organised crime, saying these challenges demand a more coordinated, intelligence-led and technology-driven approach.

He noted that the three bills before the committee, which seek to enhance funding, training and research within the Department of State Services, form part of wider efforts to strengthen Nigeria’s security architecture and improve operational effectiveness.

Abbas maintained that reliable funding, advanced intelligence training and robust research capabilities remain crucial to ensuring that security agencies are adequately prepared to meet current and future threats.

He urged stakeholders participating in the hearing to offer constructive recommendations that would enrich the legislative process and contribute to a more effective final outcome, emphasising that broad-based participation remains at the heart of democratic lawmaking.

The hearing is part of ongoing efforts by the National Assembly to strengthen Nigeria’s security framework through enhanced funding mechanisms, institutional reforms and improved intelligence capacity.