Headline

Coup: Why President Tinubu Can’t Deploy Troops To Niger – SANs

Published

2 years ago

August 6, 2023

Senior Advocates of Nigeria, SANs, have adduced reasons why President Bola Tinubu cannot unilaterally deploy troops to Niger Republic to restore democratic rule in the troubled country.

In separate interviews with Vanguard, the learned silks maintained that for the armed forces of Nigeria to be deployed on a combat duty in Niger Republic, President Tinubu, must secure the approval of the National Assembly.

However, the senior lawyers pointed out that the only time the 1999 Constitution, as amended, permits the President to deploy soldiers to another country without prior approval of the legislative arm of the government, is when there is an imminent threat to national security.

In such situation, they stressed that the President, having deployed troops outside the shores of the country, must within seven days, seek approval of the National Assembly, which in turn must take 14 days to either okay or reject the military action.

According to Jacob Usman, SAN: “By Section 5 (4) (a) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the President cannot declare a state of war between Nigeria and any other country, except with the approval of both the House of Reps and the Senate, sitting in a joint session.

“What it means is that if there is any threat to Nigeria and the President is of the view that there is a need to declare a state of war between Nigeria and that country, he must seek the approval of the National Assembly, both the Senate and House of Reps in a joint session, not with each of them sitting independently.

“Subsection 4 (b) provides that except with the prior approval of the Senate, the President shall not deploy any of the armed forces of Nigeria outside the country.

“This is where the case of Niger Republic comes in. The President wrote for the approval of the Senate for the armed forces of Nigeria to be deployed on a combat duty out of Nigeria and the Senate, to my understanding rejected the approval.

“What this means is that without the Senate approving the presidential request, the President cannot and shall not deploy any armed forces of the federation out of Nigeria on a combat duty.

“However, it does not end there. By reason of subsection 5, there is a proviso that notwithstanding the provision of subsection 4, the President, in consultation with the National Defence Council, may deploy armed forces out of Nigeria on a limited combat duty if he is satisfied that there is a real threat, that is, that Nigeria is under a real threat and the President could not get the approval of the Senate.

“He could deploy armed forces within seven days and must seek the approval of the Senate which must either approve or reject it within 14 days.

“Where the Senate approves the request within 14 days, then, the troops may be deployed. But where the Senate rejects the request, the President must recall the troops back to Nigeria,” Usman, SAN, added.

Likewise, another SAN, Mr. Abeny Mohammed, argued that the consent of the Senate was a constitutional requirement “that cannot be vetoed by the President.”

He said: “Sending Nigerian troops to a foreign country to fight or to engage in war with a foreign country are serious matters that cannot be left to the decision of the president alone.

“It requires the collective decision by the President and the Senate. However, in the event of a sudden attack on Nigeria, the president can deploy troops to repel the attack and defend the country without waiting for the consent of the Senate, which he can seek and obtain subsequently.”

Adding his voice to the debate, a Professor of Law, Epiphany Azinge, SAN, said: “It is not in dispute that the President is the commander -in-chief of the Armed forces, but when it comes to deployment of troops, he needs the acquircence of the Senate.

“This is for many reasons. First is to avoid outright dictatorship by Mr President. Second is to ensure budgetry approval for the conflict.

“A President that decides to engage in conflict against the advice of the Senate may be starved of funds for the prosecution of the war. That is not in the best interest of the nation.”

Similarly, Mr. Dayo Akinlaja, SAN, when he was asked if President Tinubu could deploy troops to Niger Republic despite the withdrawal of consent by the Senate, said: “The answer is an emphatic NO.”

Continuing, he said: “It is the prerogative of the Senate to approve the deployment of troops for combat duty outside Nigeria.

“The President is expected to obtain the prior approval of the Senate before any such deployment.

“Where the approval is refused, that ends the process. Although the Constitution allows the President to deploy troops before approval where there is imminent danger of attack of the Country and thereafter seek approval within seven days, that exceptional scenario does not arise in the instant situation.”

On his part, a front-line human rights lawyer, Chief Nkereuwem Udofia Akpan, said: “You will agree with me that ours is a Constitutional democracy fashioned after the American model where the doctrine of separation of powers forms the fulcrum upon which that structure revolves.

“A community reading of Sections 5, 305(1), (2) and (3) of the Constitution shows that the president can

declare a state of emergency and deplore troops outside the shores of Nigeria in certain situations.

“The conditions laid down for such a declaration are set out in section 305 (3) subparagraphs (a)-(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

“By the provisions of subsection 2 of section 305, the President is mandated to make copies of the official gazette of the federation containing the proclamation to both the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representative.

“Upon receipt of the Gazette containing the proclamation, both houses will meet and consider whether to approve or reject .

“Clearly, the President cannot override the decision of both houses of Parliament if those houses at plenary vote to reject the proclamation. The constitution grants the National Assembly powers in section 305 (2) to jettison and refuse to approve the proclamation.

“Curiously subsection 5 of section 5 of the same Constitution provides that the president can ignore the National Assembly and consult with the National Defense Council to deplore troops outside the shores of Nigeria on the condition that national security is under imminent threat or danger.

“Now, the proviso to that section 5(5) of the constitution mandates the President to still go back to NASS for approval for the action and at that point NASS may approve or reject the deployment

“In summary, it appears to me that the framers of our constitution never envisaged a situation where the President can go to war without any input from both houses of the NASS- Senate and House of Representative,” he added.

It will be recalled that the Senate had last Friday, rejected President Tinubu’s request to deploy troops to Niger Republic in support of move by the leadership of the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, to reinstate President Mohammed Bazoum, who was recently ousted from office through a coup d’état.
VANGUARD

Headline

Mexican President Pledges Tougher Sexual‑harassment Laws After Being Groped

Published

3 days ago

November 6, 2025

Editor

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Thursday unveiled proposals to boost reporting and prosecution of sexual abuse after she herself was groped in the street in an attack that caused outrage.

Mexico’s first woman president, 63, was assaulted on Tuesday by a drunken man while walking through the streets of the capital.

The assault made global headlines and focused attention on the dangers and harassment suffered by many women in the Latin American country.

Sheinbaum has pressed charges against her attacker for sexual harassment, a charge that in Mexico City covers lewd behaviour and groping.

She has also ordered a review of the widely diverging laws on sexual harassment and abuse across Mexico’s 32 states.

Sexual harassment in public spaces is so prevalent in Mexico that in the last decade, the authorities have created women-only spaces on the metro.

Other cities with similar arrangements include Mumbai and Rio.

“May what happened serve so that women do not feel alone in situations of harassment or abuse… and for this to happen, there must be institutions and a government that supports them,” Sheinbaum told her regular morning press conference.

The UN says around 70 per cent of Mexican girls and women aged 15 and over will experience at least one incident of sexual harassment in their lives.

Sheinbaum said that 45 per cent had experienced sexual “abuse.”

The man who assaulted her put one arm around her shoulder while she was greeting supporters, and with his other hand touched her hip and chest while attempting to kiss her neck.

A member of Sheinbaum’s security detail pulled him away.

Citlalli Hernandez, Secretary for Women, said more than 25,000 complaints of sexual harassment have been filed so far this year.

Headline

US Lawmakers Urge Sanctions On Miyetti Allah, Others Over Alleged Religious Violations

Published

3 days ago

November 6, 2025

Editor

The United States House of Representatives has urged the Departments of State and Treasury to impose targeted sanctions on individuals and organisations, including Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria and Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore, over alleged violations of religious freedom in Nigeria.

This was contained in a resolution introduced before the House on Tuesday and cited by The PUNCH from the US Congress website on Wednesday.

Recall that Trump, in a post on Truth over the weekend, declared Nigeria a “Country of Particular Concern” and threatened to take military action if the country did not stem the alleged killings of Christians.

Filed as H. Res. 860 in the 119th Congress, the resolution, submitted by Rep. Christopher Smith with Rep. Paul Huizenga as a co-sponsor, commends President Donald Trump for redesignating Nigeria as a CPC.

The sponsors decried the alleged worsening persecution of Christians and other religious minorities.

They cited a catalogue of findings and reports that informed the measure, including media accounts and NGO data alleging large-scale attacks on civilians, destruction of places of worship, and a pattern of impunity.

The resolution reads in parts, “For over a decade, Islamic terror organisations have carried out mass murder, rape, kidnappings, and other atrocities targeting mostly Nigerian Christians and non-Fulani moderate Muslim populations, resulting in mass displacement and destruction of places of worship

“Prominent Christian and Muslim leaders have been kidnapped or assassinated, including priests, pastors, and imams who advocate for religious tolerance;

“Religious leaders, such as Father Remigius Iyhula and Bishop Wilfred Anagbe, who testified on March 12, 2025, at a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the persecution and targeted killings of Christians in the Diocese of Makurdi, have faced intimidation, threats, and harassment from both extremist groups and government authorities.”

Supporters of the measure argued that the CPC redesignation would strengthen diplomatic leverage to press Nigeria for accountability and protection of religious minorities.

“The designation of Nigeria as a CPC will enhance diplomatic efforts to encourage the Nigerian government to take necessary actions to protect religious minorities and uphold fundamental human rights,” they said.

They therefore moved that “President Donald Trump acted appropriately and decisively to redesignate Nigeria as a CPC and hold the Nigerian government accountable for its complicity in religious persecution by radical Islamists, such as Boko Haram and Fulani terrorists.”

They further recommended conditioning US foreign assistance on demonstrable steps by Nigeria to prevent persecution, prosecute alleged perpetrators, and care for displaced populations.

“The State Department should provide immediate humanitarian assistance directly to faith-based groups to support internally displaced people in Nigeria’s middle belt states.

“The United States, through the Department of State and Department of Treasury, should impose targeted sanctions, including visa bans and asset freezes under the Global Magnitsky framework and other restrictive measures, on individuals and entities responsible for severe violations of religious freedom in Nigeria, including sanctions against Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) and Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore, and should place Fulani-Ethnic Militias operating in Benue and Plateau States on the Entities of Particular Concern List under the International Religious Freedom Act,” the resolution read.

The resolution also asked the US to justify the purposes and amounts of recent security and development assistance to Nigeria and to tie future support to improved human-rights outcomes.

The resolution was referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Judiciary Committee for further consideration.

If it advances out of committee, the resolution would mark a clear congressional signal backing Trump’s CPC decision and could open the door to further legislative or executive actions.

Meanwhile, the Federal Government had said the United States’ designation of Nigeria as a “country of particular concern” over alleged violations of religious freedom is based on a wrong perception of the country’s security challenges.

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, stated this on Wednesday in Abuja while addressing journalists.

Idris said the US position stemmed from “misrepresentation and misinformation” about Nigeria’s internal security situation.

According to him, terrorism and violent crimes in Nigeria do not target any particular religious group.

“Nigeria faces long-standing security challenges that have impacted Christians and Muslims alike.

“Any narrative suggesting that the Nigerian state is failing to take action against religious attacks is based on misinformation or faulty data,” Idris said.

Headline

Nancy Pelosi, First Female Speaker Of US House, Announces Retirement

Published

3 days ago

November 6, 2025

Editor

Nancy Pelosi, a towering figure in US politics and the first woman to serve as speaker of the House of Representatives, announced on Thursday that she will step down at the next election.

“I will not be seeking reelection to Congress,” said the 85-year-old Democrat who has been one of President Donald Trump’s fiercest opponents.

In a video targeted at her hometown constituents in San Francisco, Pelosi said that she would serve her final year “with a grateful heart.”

Pelosi — whose term ends in January 2027 — was the first woman to lead a major political party in the US Congress.

Despite entering political office later in life, she quickly rose through the ranks to become a darling of liberal West Coast politics and, eventually, one of the most powerful women in US history.

She is in her 19th term and has represented her San Francisco-area district for 38 years. But her fame centers especially on her renowned skills at the national level, leading her party for two decades.

As House speaker for eight years, she was second in line to the presidency, after the vice president, including during Trump’s chaotic first term.

She was revered for her ability to corral her often fractious caucus through difficult votes, including Barack Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act and Joe Biden’s infrastructure programs.

Republicans painted her as the driving force behind a liberal elite that had turned its back on American values and was undermining the social fabric.

Trump especially made her a target, repeatedly insulting her as “crazy Nancy.” Pelosi never shrank from direct confrontations with the Republican leader, including demonstratively ripping up a copy of his State of the Union speech on live television.

Rumors of her departure had been swirling for weeks on Capitol Hill, but she deflected questions over her political future, insisting that she was focused on a redistricting reform initiative in California that passed on Tuesday.

“I say to my colleagues in the House all the time, no matter what title they have bestowed upon me — speaker, leader, whip — there has been no greater honor for me than to stand on the House floor and say, I speak for the people of San Francisco,” Pelosi said.

“I have truly loved serving as your voice,” she said. “As we go forward, my message to the city I love is this: San Francisco, know your power.”