Headline

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

Published

3 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

FG Summons S. African Envoy Over Rising Xenophobic Attacks On Nigerians

Published

2 days ago

May 3, 2026

Editor

The Federal Government has summoned the Acting High Commissioner of South Africa in Abuja over renewed concerns about xenophobic attacks and protests targeting foreign nationals, including Nigerians, living in that country.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the envoy is expected at its headquarters on Monday, May 4, 2026, for a high-level engagement aimed at addressing the growing tension and safeguarding bilateral relations between both countries.

In a statement issued on Sunday, the spokesperson for the Ministry, Kimiebi Ebienfa, said Nigeria would formally express its “profound concern” over recent developments in South Africa, particularly reports of harassment, violence, and destruction of property belonging to foreign nationals.

According to the ministry, the meeting will focus on ongoing demonstrations by various groups in South Africa and documented cases of attacks on Nigerians and their businesses in parts of the country.

“The objective of this engagement is to formally convey the Nigerian Government’s profound concern regarding recent events that have the potential to impact the established cordial relations between Nigeria and South Africa,” the statement read.

It added that discussions would also address ongoing demonstrations by various groups within South Africa and documented instances of mistreatment of Nigerian citizens and attacks on their businesses.

The ministry acknowledged growing anger among Nigerians over reports of xenophobic violence but urged restraint, stressing that diplomatic engagement remained the preferred channel for resolution.

It assured Nigerians that the Federal Government was actively engaging South African authorities to ensure the protection of its citizens abroad.

“The Ministry is aware of the growing discontent among Nigerians concerning the treatment of their nationals in South Africa. Nevertheless, it implores the Nigerian public to remain calm and reiterates the Federal Government’s commitment to protecting the rights and well-being of Nigerian citizens residing in South Africa,” the statement added.

The latest diplomatic move comes amid renewed reports of xenophobic tensions in parts of South Africa, where foreign-owned businesses have occasionally been targeted during protests linked to unemployment and economic hardship.

South Africa has a history of xenophobic violence dating back to 2008, with subsequent flare-ups in 2015 and 2019, when mobs attacked migrants, looted shops, and displaced thousands of foreign nationals across several provinces.

In past incidents, Nigerians and other African nationals were among those affected, prompting strong diplomatic reactions from Abuja and calls for stronger protection of foreign communities.

While South African authorities have repeatedly condemned such attacks and deployed security forces to restore order during outbreaks of violence, concerns have persisted over recurring hostility in some communities.

Headline

Mississippi Man ‘Kills Mother, Flushes Her Remains Down Toilet’

Published

3 days ago

May 2, 2026

Editor

A 29-year-old Mississippi man, Zachary Lavel Jackson Jr., has been charged with multiple offences, including first-degree murder, over the death of his mother, Lana Brown Bradley, after deputies responded to her Natchez home on April 4 following a missing person report from relatives.

The Adams County Sheriff’s Office said deputies were called to Bradley’s residence after her oldest son was unable to reach her the previous day.

Jackson was initially identified as a family member before investigators confirmed he was her son.

Sheriff Travis Patten described the case as deeply disturbing.“This is by far the most heinous crime that I’ve ever witnessed in my entire life. We weren’t out there that day; this was one of those things when we walked up.

“This was one of those cases that you will never, ever forget in your life. This is the type of case that follows you home,” Patten told WJTV.

According to the sheriff, deputies noticed signs of a recent cleanup when they arrived at the home.

“As soon as they walked in the house, they could just see where somebody had been cleaning up, and they could smell chemicals all throughout the house.

“Floor was extremely slippery. And the older son said that this is just unusual for the youngest son to be cleaning up the house like that,” Patten explained.

Jackson, the youngest son, was found in a bathroom, where deputies allegedly made a discovery that became central to the investigation.

“I can say what was in the toilet, and it was her flesh. He chopped her up in pieces and dismembered her in a way that whoever came looking for her would have to do their due diligence to find her, and that’s just what we did,” the sheriff said.

Authorities said Jackson allegedly placed parts of his mother’s body in a suitcase and attempted to dispose of other remains.

Jackson faces charges of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, mayhem and tampering with evidence.

Headline

Iran Says War With US May Resume As Trump Rejects Proposal

Published

3 days ago

May 2, 2026

Editor

Iran’s military has warned that the war with the United States and Israel could resume, declaring that it is fully prepared for any renewed confrontation as tensions between the sides continue to deepen.

In a statement reported by Iranian state-affiliated media, senior military officials said a return to hostilities is “likely”, citing what they described as Washington’s lack of commitment to previous agreements and negotiations.

The warning comes after US President Donald Trump expressed dissatisfaction with Iran’s latest peace proposal, saying the terms presented by Tehran included demands he “can’t agree to”.

According to officials in Tehran, Iran believes it showed flexibility during earlier negotiations, including talks held in Islamabad and during the ceasefire period. However, authorities argue that the United States has instead taken a tougher stance, widening the gap between both sides.

Iranian officials insist that key issues such as sanctions relief and the status of the Strait of Hormuz must be resolved before any broader agreement, including discussions around its nuclear programme, can progress. They also reject what they describe as US demands amounting to “surrender”.

The growing diplomatic deadlock has raised fears that another round of fighting may be imminent, with Iranian authorities indicating that preparations are already underway.

Meanwhile, the prolonged conflict continues to have far-reaching consequences within Iran. Internet monitoring group NetBlocks reports that the country has entered its 64th day of near-total internet disruption, effectively isolating it from global online networks.

The shutdown, which began after renewed anti-government protests earlier in the year and intensified following the outbreak of the war, has significantly disrupted businesses and livelihoods across the country.

Beyond Iran, the conflict is also reshaping global dynamics. Rising oil prices linked to the war have placed pressure on international markets, while geopolitical tensions have strained alliances, including between the United States and European partners.

As both sides remain far apart on key issues, analysts warn that without a breakthrough in negotiations, the fragile pause in fighting could collapse, paving the way for renewed military escalation in the region.