Connect with us

News

Dangote vs PENGASSAN: NLC mobilises workers for strike against refinery

Published

on

The Nigeria Labour Congress has directed its affiliate unions to begin urgent mobilisation and prepare for a nationwide industrial action against the Dangote Group, accusing the conglomerate of sustained anti-worker practices.

This came as the nationwide strike declared by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria on Monday against the refinery paralysed operations at key oil and gas regulatory institutions, including the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority.

Also on Monday, the National Industrial Court in Abuja restrained PENGASSAN from embarking on its industrial action against Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE, barring the union from halting crude oil and gas supply to the $20bn Lekki-based refinery.

However, PENGASSAN declared that it was not aware of the court injunction, arguing that court orders or processes were served via a court bailiff and not through social media.

In an internal memo shared with The PUNCH on Monday and addressed to the presidents and general secretaries of affiliate unions, NLC President Joe Ajaero placed NLC affiliates on alert.

The directive follows a clash between Dangote refinery and PENGASSAN. The oil union earlier announced that more than 800 workers at the Dangote refinery were dismissed after attempting to unionise. The union alleged that many of the jobs were replaced with more than 2,000 expatriates, mainly from India. Dangote has denied the accusations, saying the layoffs were part of a restructuring to improve safety and prevent sabotage, adding that over 3,000 Nigerians remain employed.

The standoff has already led PENGASSAN to order a halt to crude and gas supplies, forcing a temporary shutdown of operations at the refinery, which is critical to Nigeria’s efforts to cut fuel imports and ease pressure on foreign exchange.

Government mediators have since stepped in to prevent prolonged disruption, as a meeting held in Abuja on Monday, involving officials of the Federal Government, PENGASSAN, and Dangote Group.

Ajaero described the Dangote Group as waging a “protracted and deliberate anti-worker crusade” against the Nigerian working class. “The ongoing battle with PENGASSAN and NUPENG is merely a symptom of a deeper sickness; a capitalist pathology of union-busting, worker enslavement, and gross impunity that defines the Group’s industrial relations strategy,” he wrote.

He accused the company of operating “as a state within a state,” alleging that Dangote has for too long flouted Section 40 of the Nigerian Constitution, violated International Labour Organisation Conventions 87 and 98, and treated national labour laws with contempt.

“Their facilities are not workplaces but plantations of exploitation, where the dignity of the worker is systematically crushed to maximise profit for the few. The time for pleading and endless, fruitless dialogue is over. The moment for decisive, collective action is now,” Ajaero said.

The row is about more than jobs. The $20bn refinery is central to Nigeria’s efforts to reduce fuel imports and stabilise its shaky currency. A strike that halts production would quickly be felt across the economy. The dispute also casts a spotlight on the outsized clout of both Dangote, the country’s dominant industrial player, and the unions, which remain among the few institutions capable of mass mobilisation.

The NLC directed all affiliate unions to place their members on immediate and full alert and to commence, with immediate effect, vigorous and comprehensive unionisation of all workers within Dangote Group facilities under their jurisdiction.

It further instructed unions to begin mobilising members and resources for what it described as a full-scale and decisive engagement with the conglomerate. The Congress said the aim of the action is to compel Dangote to respect the right of every worker to freely join a union of their choice, cease all forms of intimidation and victimisation, and submit to the authority of Nigeria’s labour laws and institutions.

See also  Igbo Town Unions drag Lagos demolitions to UN, ECOWAS Court, alleges ethnic bias

Each affiliate union has been ordered to set up an Action Mobilisation Committee and liaise directly with the NLC national secretariat within 72 hours to coordinate strategy, logistics, and communication. Ajaero insisted that unity of purpose and action is non-negotiable.

“The impunity of the Dangote Group must be met with the resistance of organised labour. No amount of media verbiage and paid hirelings will stop us from fighting for our liberty in the face of apparent regulatory capture, where the state seems to have abdicated its responsibility to hold this behemoth accountable for its breaches of our laws,” he said.

“The blood and sweat of Nigerian workers built this conglomerate; we will not let it become a monument to their oppression. Together, we stand! Together, we will overcome.”

NLC affiliates include the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers, the National Union of Chemical, Footwear, Rubber, Leather and Non-Metallic Products Employees, the National Union of Food, Beverage and Tobacco Employees, and the National Union of Air Transport Employees.

Others include the National Union of Electricity Employees, the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria, the National Union of Textile, Garment and Tailoring Workers of Nigeria, the National Union of Metalworkers of Nigeria, the Industrial Sector Senior Staff Association of Nigeria, the Steel and Engineering Workers Union of Nigeria, and the Medical and Health Professional Senior Staff Association of Nigeria.

NNPC, others shut

The strike by PENGASSAN paralysed operations at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority.

Our correspondent observed that at the NUPRC  headquarters in Abuja, the main gate was firmly locked and key, leaving several employees stranded outside the premises. Security operatives on duty confirmed that no staff were allowed entry, in line with the strike directive issued by the union.

Similarly, activities at the NMDPRA headquarters in the busy Central Business District were completely grounded as workers fully complied with the industrial action. Confirming the situation, the PENGASSAN Chairman in NMDPRA, Tony Iziogba, told The PUNCH that the union had achieved “100 per cent compliance,” effectively restricting access to staff and visitors.

He added that his colleagues had also enforced 100 per cent compliance at the NNPCL and other relevant agencies. PENGASSAN said the strike became inevitable after the alleged wrongful dismissal of about 800 workers at the Dangote Petroleum Refinery.

Court bars PENGASSAN

The National Industrial Court, Abuja, on Monday restrained the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria from embarking on its planned industrial action against Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE. Justice Emmanuel Danjuma Subilim, in a ruling, barred the defendants from halting crude oil and gas supply to the Dangote Refinery.

Listed as defendants in the suit are the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, and the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission. Dangote Refinery, in an ex parte application filed by its counsel, George Ibrahim, secured the interim order against the defendants.

Ibrahim, in the motion, sought an order of interim injunction restraining the 1st Defendant (NNPCL), its members, agents, servants, privies, representatives, assigns, or howsoever described, from directing or effecting a halt in the supply of crude oil and gas to the Claimant.

See also  US lawmakers, Nigerian Reps hold fresh sessions over rising insecurity

He further prayed the Court to restrain them from embarking on any industrial action against the Claimant with the intention of crippling operations, blocking access roads, obstructing vehicular movement, or otherwise disrupting the operations of the Claimant or the licensees of the 2nd to 4th Defendants, as contained in the directives issued by the 1st Defendant on September 26, 2025, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

He also sought “an order of interim injunction restraining the 2nd–4th Defendants, their employees, members, agents, servants, privies, representatives, licensees, assigns or howsoever described from giving effect to the directives of the 1st Defendant to halt the supply of crude oil and gas to the Claimant; or joining, continuing, embarking on, or in any manner participating in the planned industrial action of the 1st Defendant and its affiliates or cronies or any other strike whatsoever against the Claimant/Applicant, with a view to frustrating its business and operations, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.”

Ibrahim argued that the Applicant is a duly licensed petroleum production and distribution company, engaged in refining and producing petroleum and petrochemical products for general public consumption in Nigeria. He stressed that the company provides essential services critical to the Nigerian economy and the well-being of the public.

He further contended that in recent times, incidents of sabotage by some employees at the Claimant’s plant had raised grave health and safety concerns, necessitating a re-organisation exercise which led to the disengagement of some staff. This, he noted, was communicated to all employees through a memo dated September 25, 2025.

According to him, in the early hours of September 26, 2025, the Claimant became aware of reports circulating online alleging that Nigerian workers were dismissed simply because they joined the 1st Defendant’s union.

He said the management of the Claimant promptly issued a press statement refuting the allegation, clarifying that the company was not opposed to unionisation, which it recognises as a constitutional right. He emphasised that the refinery has over 3,000 Nigerians in its workforce and that only a negligible number of staff were affected by the reorganisation exercise, which was necessitated by acts of sabotage and safety concerns.

Counsel further told the Court that by a letter dated September 26, 2025, the 1st Defendant, through its General Secretary, Lamumba Okugbawa, wrote to the Minister of Petroleum and Gas, threatening that unless the affected staff were reinstated—alleged to be over 800—the union would take steps to bring the Claimant to its knees.

“The 1st Defendant issued a press statement on September 26, 2025, erroneously describing the disengagement exercise as anti-labour practices, and alleging that the workers were victimised for joining the union, which is patently incorrect,” Ibrahim submitted.

He added that, notwithstanding the Claimant’s clarifications, the 1st Defendant became further incensed and directed its executives and members in the licensees of the 2nd–4th Defendants, who supply crude oil and gas to the Claimant, to halt such supply as a means of paralysing its operations.

“The 2nd–4th Defendants are on standby to implement the directives of the 1st Defendant through their agents and licensees, with a view to cutting off supply of crude oil and gas to the Claimant, thereby crippling its operations, unless this Honourable Court intervenes,” Ibrahim argued.

He further asserted that the 1st Defendant, aware of its membership strength across the country, was intent on carrying out its threat to shut down the Claimant’s operations unless restrained by the Court.

“The Claimant’s plant was constructed at a cost exceeding $20bn by its promoters, to address Nigeria’s decades-long energy challenges. The refinery has been making substantial contributions to the economy and meeting consumer demand. If the 1st Defendant’s threat is carried out, Nigeria would be plunged back into the dark days of energy shortages, with devastating consequences for consumers and the economy,” he submitted.

See also  Anyanwu expulsion battle: Zonal leaders plot PDP takeover

According to him, the 1st Defendant and its members have perfected plans to embark on industrial action capable of crippling the Claimant’s services to the Nigerian public and the economy, without engaging in any formal dispute resolution with the Claimant as required by law.

In his brief ruling on the ex parte application, Justice Subilim held that the balance of convenience was in favour of the Applicant, as the continuation of the threatened industrial action would irreparably damage its business and undermine the provision of essential services to the Nigerian public.

The judge ruled that it was in the interest of justice to restrain the Respondents in order to preserve industrial peace and safeguard the continuous provision of essential services pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

Justice Subilim accordingly granted the restraining order and directed that the same be served on the defendants forthwith, together with the motion on notice. The Court held that the order shall subsist for seven days only. The matter was subsequently adjourned to October 13 for the hearing of the motion on notice.

PENGASSAN reacts

Reacting, PENGASSAN General Secretary, Lumumba Okugbawa, said in a statement that the association was not aware of the court injunction. Okugbawa argued that court orders or processes are served via a court bailiff and not through social media.

He directed all members of PENGASSAN to continue with the industrial action until further instructions. “On behalf of the national leadership of our great association, I sincerely wish to commend you all for the courage we exhibited today in standing up for what is right. We have just begun, and victory is in sight.

“Our attention has been drawn to rumours making the rounds on a court injunction restraining our noble exercise. I want to unequivocally state that we have not been served anything of such. Court orders or processes are served via a court bailiff and not through social media.

“All comrades are therefore directed to continue with the industrial action until further instruction. Only information coming through our official channels should be regarded as authentic. Any further clarification you need should be sought from higher organs of the Association,” Okugbawa said on Monday

ASCSN supports TUC, PENGASSAN

The Association of Senior Civil Servants of Nigeria has thrown its weight behind the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria and the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria in condemning what they described as the “unjust and anti-labour” practices recently carried out by the management of Dangote Petroleum Refinery.

In a statement issued in Abuja on Monday, the ASCSN National President, Shehu Mohammed, said the arbitrary dismissal of workers for exercising their constitutional right to freely associate and belong to a trade union is a gross violation of Section 40 of the Nigerian Constitution and a direct breach of Nigeria’s obligations under International Labour Organisation conventions.

“Such acts are unacceptable and cannot be tolerated in a democracy. We, therefore, stand shoulder-to-shoulder with TUC and PENGASSAN in demanding the immediate reinstatement of all affected workers just as we support the call for an independent investigation into the refinery’s anti-worker practices,” the union emphasised.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Reps order IG to produce fake, PFIPC agency DG Adeyemi within 48 hours

Published

on

The House of Representatives Committee investigating the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council has directed the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, to produce the self-acclaimed Director-General of the organisation, Adeyemi Adeniyi, before it on Wednesday.

The directive was issued on Monday during the resumed investigative hearing at the National Assembly Complex, Abuja.

Representing the IG, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Bashir Abdullahi, appeared before the committee and was instructed to ensure Adeyemi’s appearance by noon on Wednesday to assist lawmakers in their ongoing investigation into the activities of the organisation.

The committee is probing the circumstances under which the PFIPC, despite not being legally established, allegedly secured office accommodation in Phase III of the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of ₦1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

The directive followed the Nigeria Police Force’s confirmation of key aspects of its criminal investigation, including petitions from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President alleging that Adeyemi fraudulently presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

The Committee Chairman, Yusuf Gagdi, said Adeyemi’s appearance had become imperative given the seriousness of the allegations and the institutions implicated in the matter.

“This committee clearly needs the suspected DG to appear before this committee. People’s names are involved. People’s integrity are involved. Institutional names are involved. Institutional integrity is involved.

“It is not an option now. We will need him here to confirm some documents to us in such a way that will not undermine our investigation to enable us to submit our report on time,” Gagdi said.

See also  Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyers withdraw from case

The committee subsequently directed its clerk to formally communicate its resolution to the Inspector-General of Police.

“The committee hereby resolves that the Inspector-General of Police of the Federal Republic of Nigeria do kindly present Mr Adeyemi on Wednesday by 12 noon. That is the ruling of the committee,” Gagdi declared.

Earlier, ACP Abdullahi informed lawmakers that although investigations were ongoing, the police had already filed an eight-count charge against Adeyemi before the Federal High Court.

“The Nigerian Police Force investigated part of this case late last year and filed eight-count charges before a Federal High Court. The case is ongoing,” he said.

He disclosed that the suspect had been arrested and arraigned, but cautioned against making public disclosures that could prejudice the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

“We don’t want to say things that are under investigation. It is definitely going to prejudice the ongoing investigation and make people have opinions that may prejudge the outcome of an investigation or judicial decision,” Abdullahi stated.

Despite the police’s reservations, the committee sought confirmation of documentary evidence already in its possession.

The police confirmed that on October 17, 2025, the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President petitioned security agencies over allegations against Adeyemi, prompting investigations that culminated in criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud.

Investigators also confirmed receiving another petition alleging that Adeyemi falsely presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

According to the police, the petition alleged that Adeyemi used the purported office to obtain accommodation within the Federal Secretariat, sought approval to recruit about 300 personnel, attempted to secure a $1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act for the non-existent agency, and planned to organise a World Investment Summit under the platform of the purported council.

See also  NCAA suspends no-pay, no-service airline enforcement order

One of the highlights of the hearing came when the committee compared signatures on documents allegedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President with signatures on authentic official correspondence obtained by the police.

When asked whether the signatures matched, the police witness responded unequivocally,”They are not the same.”

The committee said the discrepancy reinforced concerns that official State House documents may have been forged.

Gagdi further asked, “So, it is not only a letter that was suspected to be forged? We are dealing with documents that include what is said to be a forged Act of the National Assembly in an attempt to establish a fake agency,” he added.

Gagdi disclosed that investigators had identified about 29 allegedly forged documents, including purported approvals from the State House, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Ministry of Finance and several other government institutions.

According to him, representatives of many of the affected agencies had already appeared before the committee and disowned the documents attributed to their offices.

Gagdi, however, stressed that the committee had deliberately avoided compelling the police to disclose information that could compromise ongoing criminal investigations.

“We are avoiding a situation whereby they will be pushed to make statements that will undermine their ongoing investigation,” he added.

He assured that the House investigation would continue independently and that its final report could recommend further action by relevant security agencies.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

See also  Abia demolishes unapproved buildings in Umuahia market

Continue Reading

News

Forged state house letter used to create fake PFIPC agency, Acct-General reveals

Published

on

The House of Representatives’ investigation into the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council took a dramatic turn on Monday after the Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, revealed that a forged State House letter was used to obtain official government recognition for the ‘fake’ agency.

Appearing before the House Ad Hoc Committee probing the circumstances surrounding the establishment and operations of the council, Ogunjimi disclosed that the Office of the Accountant-General acted on what appeared to be an authentic correspondence from the presidency requesting the creation of an administrative code for the PIFPC, only for investigations to later establish that the letter did not originate from the State House.

The revelation is the latest in a series of disclosures before the committee, which is investigating how a non-existent presidential agency allegedly secured office accommodation in the Federal Secretariat, sought budgetary allocations, recruited personnel and obtained official government recognition through what investigators believe were forged documents.

Presenting his report, Ogunjimi said the Office of the Accountant-General first interacted with the purported council in November 2024.

According to him, “a letter dated November 7, 2024, bearing a State House reference number, requested the creation of an administrative code for the Presidential Economic Advisory Council to facilitate budgeting, accounting and financial reporting.”

He explained that, in line with established procedures, “the Office of the Accountant-General processed the request, created the administrative code and communicated its approval to the State House,” with a copy sent to the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation.

See also  US lawmakers, Nigerian Reps hold fresh sessions over rising insecurity

Following that approval, the office received additional requests from the purported council, including applications for self-accounting status, deployment of personnel, opening of Treasury Single Account and domiciliary accounts, as well as funding approvals.

Ogunjimi, however, stressed that although some administrative processes were carried out, no public funds were ever released to the council.

“It is important to note that no funds were released under salaries, overhead, capital, or any form of intervention or special allocation to the council,” Ogunjimi told the committee.

He further disclosed that while the council requested an establishment grant of ₦27.4bn, the application was rejected because there was no budgetary provision for such expenditure.

The Accountant-General also explained that although the Central Bank of Nigeria opened two domiciliary accounts for the organisation to receive inflows, the accounts never became operational because the council failed to satisfy the regulatory conditions required for their activation.

Lawmakers expressed concern over how the purported agency was able to navigate several layers of government bureaucracy without raising suspicion.

Responding, Ogunjimi made what committee members described as one of the most significant revelations of the hearing.

“The letter that was received by the Treasury was respectfully addressed as coming from the State House. That letter was never issued by the State House”, he said

The disclosure prompted members of the committee to conclude that a “hijacked” State House letter had allegedly been used to mislead government institutions into processing official requests for an agency that had no legal existence.

The committee also questioned how civil servants originally posted to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser to the President eventually became attached to the purported council without the knowledge of the Office of the Accountant-General.

See also  ‘Document Whatever I Tell You Now Because I May Die Anytime, Ife Not Yoruba Origin’ – Oluwo Of Iwo

Ogunjimi explained that two officers deployed to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser in 2010 and 2013 remained in the office after it was allegedly taken over by the new council, but no formal communication was sent to the treasury notifying it of any change.

“It was never assumed or written to us that those two officers were being taken over. The staff also never reported to the office to say that another council had taken over the office and the name had changed. As far as I was concerned, we were dealing with a new agency, not the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he said.

He further disclosed that when the purported council later requested the deployment of five additional officers, the treasury approved only three after determining that the organisation’s size did not justify the number requested.

“It was when all this matter came to light that I got to know that two of our staff were actually working or being absorbed by the agency. We never knew. We believed, based on the records available to us, that those officers were still with the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he added.

The ongoing House investigation centres on allegations that forged presidential approvals, counterfeit State House correspondence, fake Acts of the National Assembly and other falsified government documents were used to create and operate the purported Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.

The committee has already heard evidence from the Nigeria Police Force, which confirmed that criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud have been filed against the prime suspect, Adeyemi Adeniyi, at the Federal High Court.

See also  Dele Farotimi dismisses Jonathan’s political return, urges focus on these structural problems

At its sitting on Monday, the committee also directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce Adeyemi before lawmakers by noon on Wednesday to answer questions relating to the alleged forgery of official government documents and the operations of the purported presidential agency.

The committee is expected to conclude its investigation with recommendations on possible administrative, legislative and criminal actions against those found culpable.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

News

See full list of African countries that do not need proof of funds for UK’s student visa

Published

on

The United Kingdom on Monday updated its financial requirements for applicants seeking Student and Child Student visas, retaining stricter evidence rules while exempting nationals of only three African countries from submitting proof of funds at the point of application.

The updated guidance, published by the UK government on its website, listed Botswana, Mauritius and Tunisia as the only African countries whose nationals will not be required to provide financial evidence upfront unless requested during the visa decision-making process.

Other countries on the exemption list include Australia, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, among others.

Despite the exemption, the UK clarified that applicants from the listed countries must still meet all financial requirements and could be asked to provide evidence during the application process.

The guidance stated, “You must meet the financial requirements for this route when you apply; however, you may not need to submit evidence upfront as part of your application. In these circumstances, the decision maker may still request the evidence from you during the application process to prove you meet the financial requirements.”

The development means applicants from major African source countries for UK education, including Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, Egypt and others not listed, will continue to submit financial documents as part of their visa applications.

Under the revised rules, applicants for a Student visa must demonstrate they have sufficient funds to cover tuition fees as stated on their Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies and living expenses.

See also  Dele Farotimi dismisses Jonathan’s political return, urges focus on these structural problems

Students studying outside London are required to show they have £1,171 for each month of their course, up to a maximum of nine months, while those studying in London must show £1,529 per month for the same period.

Applicants travelling with dependants must also show additional funds. Those studying outside London must have £680 per month for each dependant, while applicants studying in London must show £845 monthly for each dependant, both for up to nine months.

For Child Student visa applicants, the required maintenance funds vary depending on their living arrangements, including boarding school accommodation, foster care, residence with parents or legal guardians, or independent living for eligible 16 and 17-year-olds.

The UK government also outlined acceptable sources of funds, including government-backed student loans, official financial sponsorship, personal savings and money belonging to parents or eligible partners.

However, it said applicants cannot rely on overdrafts, cryptocurrency holdings, stocks and shares, pensions or funds kept in unregulated financial institutions.

The guidance further requires applicants using personal or family funds to show that the required amount has been held for at least 28 consecutive days before the application, with financial evidence dated no more than 31 days before submission.

The UK also maintained exemptions from providing financial evidence for certain categories of applicants, including those applying to extend their stay after spending at least 12 months in the country on a valid visa, Student Union Sabbatical Officers, doctors and dentists in training, and applicants whose nationality qualifies for the reduced documentary requirement.

The latest update comes as the UK continues to tighten oversight of its international student visa system while maintaining financial eligibility requirements for prospective students seeking to study in the country.

See also  Makinde signs executive order regulating vigilante, security groups

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

Trending