By IROYIN YORUBA TELEVISION
Retired senior officers of the Nigeria Immigration Service have called for stronger funding, improved welfare and greater institutional support for the agency, arguing that Nigeria’s existing immigration structure should be strengthened before consideration is given to creating a separate Border Guards organisation.
The position was presented at the maiden Annual General Meeting of the National Association of Retired Immigration Officers, held in Abuja, where former immigration officials discussed the future of border management, migration control, institutional capacity and the welfare of personnel who served in the country’s immigration system.
The association’s president, Dr Charles E. Okafor, a retired Comptroller, said the Nigeria Immigration Service already has a central responsibility for migration management and border security and should therefore receive the resources and institutional support required to perform those functions effectively.
The meeting was held under the theme, “Strengthening Institutional Capacity and Autonomy amidst Operational Challenges: Repositioning the Nigeria Immigration Service for Border Security, Revenue Generation, Investment Promotion and Sustainable National Development.”
The discussion comes amid continuing concerns about Nigeria’s long and complex borders, cross-border crime, irregular migration, human trafficking, document fraud and the movement of people and goods across formal and informal routes.
Okafor argued that public understanding of the Nigeria Immigration Service has often focused heavily on passports, even though the agency’s statutory responsibilities extend considerably beyond the issuance of travel documents.
According to the Service’s own description of its mandate, the Nigeria Immigration Service is responsible for controlling people entering and leaving the country, issuing travel documents to eligible Nigerians inside and outside the country, issuing residence permits to foreigners, conducting border surveillance and patrol, and enforcing immigration laws and regulations assigned to it.
The Service’s organisational structure also includes a dedicated Border Management Directorate covering land control posts and patrols, airport control and aerial patrols, seaport control and marine patrols, and other border services.
These responsibilities place immigration officers at the intersection of national security, international travel, migration management and economic activity.
Nigeria shares land borders with Benin, Niger, Chad and Cameroon, while its maritime territory connects the country to the Gulf of Guinea. Millions of legitimate movements take place through Nigeria’s airports, seaports and land borders, making immigration management both a security function and an important public-service responsibility.
For the retired officers, the scale of that responsibility requires a corresponding investment in personnel, technology, infrastructure and welfare.
Okafor questioned why proposals for a separate Border Guards arrangement should receive attention when, in his view, the government should first determine whether the Nigeria Immigration Service has been adequately funded and equipped to carry out its existing responsibilities.
His position was presented as that of the association and does not necessarily represent a final government decision on the question of Border Guards.
The debate itself reflects a wider question about how Nigeria should organise border security among its different security and regulatory institutions.
Border areas can involve immigration control, customs administration, policing, military security, anti-drug enforcement, intelligence gathering and the prevention of trafficking and other cross-border crimes. Different agencies therefore have overlapping responsibilities that require coordination.
The Nigeria Immigration Service has developed a structure specifically dedicated to border management, while other security institutions operate within their own statutory mandates.
The challenge is ensuring that these responsibilities complement one another rather than create gaps, duplication or uncertainty over who is responsible for particular aspects of border security.
The association’s intervention therefore places emphasis on institutional clarity.
Okafor said the Nigeria Immigration Service should be given a stronger position within Nigeria’s national security architecture, particularly because immigration personnel operate at points where people enter and leave the country.
The retired officers also raised concerns about the welfare of serving personnel.
According to the association, immigration officers face occupational risks while carrying out border patrols and other duties, yet the sacrifices of personnel who die or suffer serious consequences in the line of duty are not always sufficiently recognised.
The association called for improved protection and welfare packages for serving officers and for better arrangements for personnel who have retired from the Service.
The welfare issue is closely connected to operational effectiveness. Officers deployed to remote border locations may require accommodation, transportation, communications equipment, protective equipment and reliable logistical support to perform their duties.
Border surveillance can be particularly demanding because Nigeria’s borders include extensive land areas, difficult terrain and waterways. Monitoring movement across such areas requires personnel who can operate effectively and technology capable of providing timely information.
The Nigeria Immigration Service has increasingly emphasised technology as part of its response.
The agency has adopted electronic passport systems, online services and border-management information systems. It has also established specialised directorates dealing with information and communications technology and cybersecurity.
The Service has said its use of technology is intended to strengthen identity verification, document security, immigration control and the management of information relating to travellers and migrants.
Nigeria’s transition toward increasingly digital immigration processes has also affected passport services.
The Service has introduced digital channels and a Contactless Passport Application System for eligible Nigerians, particularly those living abroad. In September 2026, the Service conducted passport intervention exercises in several countries, including the United States, Canada, Qatar and the United Kingdom.
The overseas intervention programme demonstrates another part of the agency’s responsibilities: providing consular-related immigration services to Nigerians outside the country while maintaining the integrity of Nigerian travel documents.
In the United Kingdom alone, the Service reported that more than 5,000 applicants had been enrolled during its September intervention exercise in London and Manchester by September 19.
Those services are separate from border patrol operations, but they are connected by the broader immigration system. Secure passports and accurate identity records contribute to the ability of border authorities to determine who is travelling and under what legal status.
The Service has also been developing international partnerships around migration management.
Earlier in September, the Nigeria Immigration Service participated in a global migration-management forum in China involving representatives from more than 100 countries and organisations. During the event, Nigerian immigration officials discussed document verification, technology, intelligence sharing and cooperation against transnational organised crime.
The Service also held bilateral discussions with Chinese immigration authorities concerning technical exchanges, information sharing and capacity building.
Such partnerships are increasingly important because migration and cross-border crime are not confined to one country.
A person involved in document fraud, human trafficking, irregular migration or another transnational offence may move between multiple jurisdictions. Effective immigration control therefore depends partly on the ability of national authorities to share relevant information and cooperate with counterpart agencies.
Nigeria’s immigration authorities have also engaged with European partners on migration management and maritime security.
The Service has said that such cooperation is intended to strengthen border governance, combat irregular migration and promote safe, orderly and regular migration.
The retired officers’ call for stronger institutional support therefore comes within a broader programme in which the Nigeria Immigration Service is attempting to combine traditional border control with technology, international cooperation and improved migration management.
Another important issue is the balance between security and legitimate movement.
Nigeria’s borders are not only security lines. They are also routes through which traders, workers, families, tourists and other travellers move between neighbouring countries.
The government therefore faces the challenge of preventing unlawful movement while ensuring that legitimate travellers and cross-border businesses are not subjected to unnecessary delays or barriers.
The Nigeria Immigration Service’s mandate includes facilitating lawful migration while enforcing immigration laws.
This is one reason the association’s proposed focus on institutional capacity extends beyond the deployment of personnel.
Better border management can require efficient processing systems, reliable databases, trained personnel, secure travel documents, intelligence capabilities and communication systems.
Technology can help, but it does not eliminate the need for trained officers.
The Service has previously said that it has expanded training and capacity building for personnel. It has also highlighted intelligence-led border control, document integrity, human-rights considerations and cooperation with other agencies as components of modern immigration management.
The debate over Border Guards consequently raises practical questions about whether additional structures would complement existing capabilities or duplicate functions already assigned to the Nigeria Immigration Service.
The retired officers have made their position clear: they believe strengthening the existing Service should receive priority.
That position is not itself a government policy decision. Any proposal to create a new border-security institution would require consideration of its legal mandate, funding, personnel structure, relationship with existing agencies and expected operational responsibilities.
It would also require an assessment of whether the additional structure would address identified gaps in border security.
The association's broader role is intended to extend beyond this debate.
NARIO was registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission in October 2022, according to its president, and its stated objectives include improving the welfare of retired immigration officers, strengthening cooperation among members and serving as an advisory body to the Nigeria Immigration Service and government on migration management and national security.
The organisation says it is not a labour union but a body seeking to contribute experience from former immigration officers to national discussions.
That experience could be relevant because retired personnel may have worked across different periods of Nigeria’s immigration development, including the transition from largely manual systems to increasingly technology-based immigration processes.
The Nigeria Immigration Service itself has undergone significant institutional changes since its origins as an immigration department within the Nigeria Police Force.
Its responsibilities expanded over time to include border patrol, alien control, travel-document issuance and broader migration management. The 2015 Immigration Act provided an updated legal framework and added a Migration Directorate to the Service’s structure.
The modern Service now includes directorates for border management, migration, passports and travel documents, visa and residency, investigation and compliance, ICT and cybersecurity, finance, human resources and other functions.
This structure reflects the broad range of responsibilities that immigration authorities must manage.
The challenge identified by the retired officers is whether the structure has sufficient funding, personnel, equipment and welfare support to operate at the level required by Nigeria’s security and migration environment.
For border communities, the issue has direct consequences.
Effective immigration control can help combat trafficking, smuggling, document fraud and other forms of cross-border crime, but border communities also depend on lawful movement and trade. Poorly managed borders can create security vulnerabilities while excessively restrictive systems can affect legitimate economic and social activity.
A modern immigration strategy therefore has to manage both objectives.
The government has continued to invest in technological improvements, including automated systems and digital immigration services. The Ministry of Interior has said that such reforms are intended to strengthen border governance while improving service delivery.
At the same time, the ministry has called on the Nigeria Immigration Service to strengthen border control and improve the capacity of its officers.
These developments indicate that the question of institutional capacity remains relevant regardless of whether a separate Border Guards structure is eventually considered.
The central issue is how Nigeria can ensure that the agencies responsible for border management have the authority, resources, personnel and technology necessary to perform their legally assigned duties.
The retired officers have now added their voices to that discussion, calling for greater attention to the Nigeria Immigration Service and its personnel.
Their concerns about welfare also place attention on the people behind the border-management system. Officers cannot effectively perform demanding duties if their working conditions, equipment and welfare arrangements are inadequate.
The association is seeking a review of retirement conditions as well, arguing that former officers who spent decades serving the country should receive appropriate consideration after leaving active service.
The government and the Nigeria Immigration Service will ultimately determine what institutional changes, funding arrangements or policy measures are adopted.
For now, the retired officers’ intervention has placed three issues firmly on the agenda: the future structure of border security, the operational capacity of the Nigeria Immigration Service and the welfare of serving and retired immigration personnel.
The debate comes at a time when Nigeria is seeking to improve border governance through technology, international cooperation and stronger migration-management systems.
Whether through existing institutions or any future reforms, the effectiveness of Nigeria’s immigration system will depend on its ability to secure the country’s borders while allowing legitimate movement, protecting travellers’ rights, maintaining reliable identity systems and responding to emerging forms of transnational crime.
The latest call from retired immigration officers therefore goes beyond a disagreement over the proposed Border Guards concept. It has reopened a wider discussion about how Nigeria should organise, fund and modernise the institutions responsible for managing its borders and migration system.
As that discussion continues, the experience of serving and retired immigration personnel, the statutory responsibilities of existing agencies and the government’s broader security and migration objectives will all remain relevant to any decision concerning the future of Nigeria’s border-management architecture.