Sam Amadi Explains Why Tinubu Removed IGP Kayode Egbetokun

The Director of the Abuja School of Social and Political Thought, Dr. Sam Amadi, has offered insights into the reasons behind the removal of former Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, by President Bola Tinubu, arguing that a mix of controversy, performance concerns, and political calculation likely informed the decision.

Speaking during an interview on Arise News, Amadi suggested that the presidency often takes a pragmatic approach when reshuffling key security positions, especially when office holders begin to attract controversies or are perceived to be delivering diminishing value.

According to Amadi, leadership at the highest level of government is rarely sentimental. Once an appointee becomes more of a liability than an asset, the tendency is for such an individual to be eased out, regardless of prior loyalty or proximity to power.

“The former Inspector-General was saddled with too many controversies and, operationally, was not fantastic,” Amadi said. “When people in such exalted offices become a burden, they are thrown away. Hiring and firing decisions are often made based on reality.”

He explained that the decision to replace the IGP could be viewed from both operational and political lenses. From a security standpoint, Amadi argued that President Tinubu may be seeking to inject new energy and improve performance within the nation’s security architecture, particularly in the face of persistent insecurity and rising criminality across several parts of the country.

“I think in making some changes, one of the considerations is to improve performance, especially in security,” he noted. “Insecurity has remained a major concern, and any administration under pressure to deliver results will naturally look for ways to reimagine its team.”

However, Amadi went further to suggest that political considerations cannot be completely ruled out. He likened the situation to a football coach making substitutions to increase the chances of winning a crucial match, adding that presidents often anticipate future political contests when making strategic appointments.

“Sometimes, these decisions are also informed by projections of the next election,” he said. “It’s like a football team where a coach substitutes players to bring in those who are more likely to deliver at critical moments.”

The political analyst emphasized that individuals who lack strong political backing or are not considered indispensable to the administration’s political survival are often the first to be sacrificed during a reshuffle.

“What happens with the presidency is that when the value addition is not much, whether politically or in terms of performance, you are likely going to be thrown away sooner or later,” Amadi stated. “Presidents retain the capacity to reimagine governance, and in doing so, those who are not very useful get cut off.”

The removal of Egbetokun has continued to generate intense debate across political and public spaces. While some Nigerians see the development as a long-overdue corrective step, especially amid claims that the former IGP had exceeded his retirement age, others believe the change is part of a broader recalibration of the security leadership ahead of future political contests.

Critics of the former IGP had often accused the police leadership under his watch of failing to significantly curb insecurity, while supporters argue that the structural and funding challenges facing the Nigeria Police Force make it difficult for any IGP to succeed without deep systemic reforms.

Amadi’s comments reflect a growing school of thought that sees leadership changes in Nigeria’s security sector as driven not only by tenure or legality, but also by perceptions of political usefulness, public confidence, and electoral calculations.

As the Tinubu administration continues to restructure key institutions, analysts believe more changes may follow, particularly in areas where public pressure is intense and performance is under scrutiny. Whether the removal of Egbetokun will translate into tangible improvements in policing and internal security remains to be seen, but it has once again highlighted the delicate balance between governance, politics, and performance in Nigeria’s democracy.