Headline

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

Published

2 years ago

August 6, 2023

Editor

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

10 African Countries With Highest Military Spending In 2025

Published

16 hours ago

June 26, 2025

Editor

The reality of African military spending in 2025 is shaped by geography, political dynamics, economic capability and regional threats.

Defence budgets across Africa are telling a story of evolving priorities. While some countries are pouring resources into modernising their armed forces, others are focusing on stabilising fragile internal structures or managing limited resources in the face of growing security threats. The top military spenders on the continent this year reflect this diversity in strategy and circumstance.

At the top of the list is Algeria, with a defence allocation of around $25 billion. This comes as little surprise given the country’s longstanding military tradition and its interest in maintaining regional dominance. Algeria has been particularly focused on modernising its air defence and acquiring advanced military hardware. With ongoing tensions involving its neighbour Morocco and instability in nearby Sahel countries, Algeria’s military investment is not only about deterrence but also about preparedness.

Morocco comes in second, spending approximately $13.4 billion on its defence sector. Much of Morocco’s budget is believed to go toward upgrading its air force and surveillance capabilities. The ongoing situation in Western Sahara continues to influence the country’s military posture, and Morocco has increasingly turned to Western suppliers for equipment. Its investment strategy also reflects a broader ambition to assert influence and ensure national security amid rising regional instability.

Egypt remains a heavyweight in African military affairs, with nearly $6 billion dedicated to defence this year. The country maintains one of the largest and most experienced armed forces in Africa. Egypt’s strategic location and ties to global powers play a major role in shaping its military spending. Its focus areas include naval strength in the Red Sea, border protection, and counterterrorism operations in the Sinai region. A significant portion of Egypt’s budget also supports joint military exercises and maintaining long-term partnerships with Western allies.

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, is allocating around $3.1 billion to its military in 2025. Faced with persistent insurgencies in the northeast, rising cases of banditry, and threats to oil infrastructure, Nigeria is investing more in surveillance, tactical response, and mobility. However, despite the budget size, questions persist about how effectively these resources are managed. Internal inefficiencies and corruption have often limited the impact of military spending, although reforms are slowly gaining traction.

Libya, despite enduring years of political fragmentation and conflict, ranks fifth with $3 billion in defence expenditure. The country’s spending is shaped largely by the need to rebuild military institutions and secure borders that have long been porous. Though rival factions still hold sway in different regions, recent moves toward unification have led to increased central oversight of defence funding. Libya’s military priorities include stabilising key infrastructure, reducing foreign military involvement, and restoring national cohesion.

South Africa, with a budget of roughly $2.3 billion, is the highest spender in Sub-Saharan Africa after Nigeria. The country faces fewer direct security threats than others on this list, but it maintains a capable and relatively advanced defence sector. Budget limitations in recent years have led to ageing equipment and recruitment challenges. Even so, South Africa continues to contribute to regional peacekeeping missions and has been increasing its focus on cyber defence and modernisation through strategic planning.

Ethiopia’s military spending stands at about $2.1 billion this year. Following recent internal conflicts, the country is focused on rebuilding and restructuring its military forces. Spending is expected to go toward restocking supplies, increasing professionalism in the ranks, and improving border security, particularly with Sudan and Eritrea. Given its geographic location and history of regional involvement, Ethiopia’s defence capabilities are considered crucial not only for internal stability but also for regional balance.

Tanzania is allocating approximately 1.4 billion dollars to its defence sector in 2025. Though not frequently in the headlines for security concerns, Tanzania quietly invests in protecting its borders, maintaining internal stability, and supporting African Union peacekeeping operations. Its military also contributes to anti-narcotics efforts and maritime safety, given its coastal location. Recent moves show a growing interest in enhancing training programs and building stronger ties with foreign partners for logistics and support.

Tunisia matches Tanzania’s budget with a similar figure of 1.4 billion dollars. In Tunisia’s case, much of the defence spending is directed toward counterterrorism and intelligence operations. The country has faced several security incidents over the past decade and has prioritised preventing extremist activities, particularly in remote border areas. Efforts have also been made to modernise internal security structures and improve cybersecurity, often with the support of international partners who view Tunisia as a strategic bridge between Africa and Europe.

Kenya closes the list with a defence budget of $1.3 billion. The country has played a consistent role in regional peacekeeping, especially in Somalia. Its military priorities include border security, maritime surveillance, and improving response to terrorism-related threats in the northeastern regions. Kenya has been working to modernise its force structure, with growing investments in technology, training, and partnerships with countries that support its regional security mission.

Country Budget Military Rank in Africa

1 Algeria $25.0 billion 1st

2 Morocco $13.4 billion 4th

3 Egypt $5.9 billion 2nd

4 Nigeria $3.1 billion 3rd

5 Libya $3.0 billion 9th

6 South Africa $2.3 billion 5th

7 Ethiopia $2.1 billion 6th

8 Tanzania $1.4 billion 10th

9 Tunisia $1.4 billion 8th

10 Kenya $1.3 billion 7th

Headline

Africa Loses $7bn Annually On Medical Tourism – Afreximbank

Published

16 hours ago

June 26, 2025

Editor

The African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) says Nigeria and other African nations are losing billions of dollars annually to medical tourism.

Afreximbank’s Export Development Managing Director, Mrs Oluranti Doherty, made the assertion while speaking at the 32nd Afreximbank Annual Meetings (AAM2025) in Abuja on Thursday.

Doherty said the trend was hindering economic development and local healthcare infrastructure.

She identified the soaring costs of medical tourism as a major drain on African economies.

According to her, Nigeria alone loses an estimated $1.1 billion annually to medical tourism, while the entire African continent collectively forfeits approximately $7 billion yearly.

“We had our member countries losing a lot of foreign exchange to medical tourism.

“We just talked about Nigeria, where our medical tourism annually is about $1.1 billion.

“The entire continent is about $7 billion just because we can’t help ourselves with ourselves when we come up with chronic diseases.

“ That’s money that’s going to other economies, building up their institutions,” she said.

She noted that the capital outflow diverts funds that could be invested in local healthcare.

Doherty added that the development contributes to a “brain drain” of skilled medical professionals from the continent.

“Another thing we noted was a great way we were losing a lot of our good talents.
“The best of talents in the health sector were going out of the continent, working in places such as India, Asia, Middle East, America, and that often was an issue,” she said.

Doherty said the bank launched its Health and Medical Tourism Programme in 2012 long before the broader recognition of healthcare’s connection to economic security in response to the challenge.

“Afreximbank was innovative. I call us the innovative financier, innovative investors.

“We recognised this part since 2012 and we set about doing something about it.

“A key initiative borne from this foresight is the Africa Medical Center of Excellence (AMCE) in Abuja, a 170-bed facility boasting state-of-the-art equipment, including an 18 MeV cyclotron, a three-Tesla MRI, and a 20-bed ICU.

“Afreximbank has invested over $450 million to establish and scale up this project,” she said.

The official praised the leadership behind the AMCE, noting, “Afreximbank had to go where no one has gone before; Afreximbank’s leaders adhered to the dreamers.

“The AMCE aims to provide healthcare services comparable to global standards, not just African standards.

“I’m talking about global standard. I’m talking about Africans coming up with solutions to challenge,” she said.

She, however, stressed the need to build trust in local healthcare facilities and ensure access for all to stem medical tourism.

Headline

Court Remands Teacher Over Alleged Sexual Assault On 2 Pupils

Published

16 hours ago

June 26, 2025

Editor

An Ikeja Chief Magistrates’ Court on Thursday remanded a 27-year-old teacher, Wisdom Anokwuru, in Kirikiri Correctional Centre over alleged sexual assault on two pupils.

The Chief Magistrate, Mrs O.O Kushanu, who did not take Anokwuru’s plea, ordered that the file should be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions for advice.

Kushanu adjourned the case until Sept. 15 for mention.

The defendant, who resides at No. 5, Goodluck Avenue, Ibaranje, Ikotun, Lagos, is facing a charge of sexual assault.

Earlier, the Prosecutor, ASP Adegoke Ademigbuji, told the court that the defendant committed the offences on June 17 at a private school in Ikotun, Lagos.

Ademigbuji said that the defendant took the girls, both 8-year-old to the school library and touched their private parts.

He said that the defendant also showed the girls a porn video on his phone.

Ademigbuji said the girls later informed the school administrator and the defendant was subsequently arrested.

The prosecutor said offences contravened Sections 135 and 171 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.(