Nigeria's POSSAP Sparks Biometric Duplication Criticism Amid Data Fragmentation

The Nigerian Police Force (NPF) launched the Police Specialised Services Automation Project (POSSAP) on June 2, 2022, as a digital platform to streamline access to police services such as Police Character Certificates, Tint Permits, and Specialised Escort Services. The initiative is part of a broader government effort to modernise and reduce corruption in public services. Central to this is the requirement for citizens to submit biometric data, including fingerprints, to access these services [1].

However, POSSAP’s biometric mandate has drawn criticism for its redundancy. Nigeria already has multiple biometric databases, including the National Identity Number (NIN), Bank Verification Number (BVN), and passport systems, all of which collect similar data from citizens. Over 100 million Nigerians have enrolled for the NIN, while the BVN, introduced in 2014, captures biometric data for banking purposes. The Nigerian Immigration Service also collects biometrics for passport issuance. Yet, POSSAP does not integrate with these existing systems, forcing citizens to repeatedly submit their biometric data for different services [1].

The lack of interoperability between these databases has led to widespread public frustration. Citizens must endure long queues and travel costs to designated police registries for biometric capture, despite already having submitted this information to other government agencies. This duplication not only increases the financial and logistical burden on individuals but also raises concerns about data privacy and security. The Foundation for Investigative Journalism (FIJ) has previously reported instances of black-market sales of NIN and BVN data, indicating vulnerabilities in Nigeria’s data ecosystem. POSSAP’s collection of new biometric data risks exacerbating this issue without clear evidence of enhanced security measures [1].

The establishment of POSSAP Solutions Ltd., the company responsible for the platform, has also raised questions about transparency and accountability. The firm was registered in 2021, shortly after the Federal Executive Council approved the project, and is led by CEO Dr. David Ibhawoh. While public-private partnerships are common, there is a lack of publicly available information regarding the company’s ownership, selection process, or prior experience, prompting concerns about opaque procurement practices in Nigeria [1].

Further complicating the issue is the perceived intent behind POSSAP. Critics argue that the project could be generating revenue for the NPF under the Federal Government’s Strategic Revenue Growth Initiative, rather than prioritising efficiency and citizen convenience. The cost of maintaining multiple biometric systems—across hardware, software, and personnel—could be better allocated to unify existing systems like the NIN, which was originally designed to serve as a centralised identifier. A 2024 World Bank report on digital identity systems noted that Nigeria’s lack of data integration hinders service delivery and increases costs for citizens [1].

The logistical and financial burden on citizens is particularly acute for low-income Nigerians, who face higher costs in both time and money to navigate the fragmented identity landscape. The absence of a clear data governance framework for the NPF also fuels distrust, as it is unclear how the collected biometric data will be stored, used, or shared. In contrast, the NIMC operates under the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR), offering a more defined legal framework for data protection [1].

For POSSAP to succeed, the NPF must prioritise interoperability with existing biometric systems. This would not only reduce costs and citizen inconvenience but also align with global best practices in digital governance, such as Estonia’s single digital ID system, which demonstrates how centralised databases can streamline services while enhancing security. Until Nigeria unifies its biometric databases, initiatives like POSSAP will remain inefficient, reflecting bureaucratic inertia rather than digital progress [1].

Source: [1]title1.............................(https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/689860b49af91a539f4387f6/)