Connect with us

News

Why Tinubu sacked service chiefs — Presidency

Published

on

The Presidency has given further insight into the reason for the sacking and replacement of service chiefs in the country.

While denying that the military shake-up was connected to a rumored coup plot, the Presidency said it was a move to “inject new direction” into the armed forces.

The Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, told Saturday PUNCH that Tinubu acted within his authority to make leadership changes in the military.

“Service chiefs can be hired and fired by the President. He is the Commander-in-Chief. He has the power to hire and fire,” Onanuga said.

Earlier on Friday, the President had announced sweeping changes in the military hierarchy.

A statement by the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communication, Sunday Dare, named General Olufemi Oluyede as the new Chief of Defence Staff, replacing General Christopher Musa.

It added, “The new Chief of Army Staff is Major-General W. Shaibu; Air Vice Marshall S.K. Aneke is Chief of Air Staff; while Rear Admiral I. Abbas is the new Chief of Naval Staff. Chief of Defence Intelligence, Major-General E.A.P. Undiendeye, retains his position.”

Tinubu charged the new service chiefs to justify the confidence reposed in them by enhancing the professionalism, vigilance, and comradeship that define Nigeria’s Armed Forces.

The appointments, Dare said, took immediate effect.

The development came barely a week after an online media platform, Sahara Reporters, published a story alleging that some military officers plotted to remove President Tinubu.

The report, which went viral on October 19, linked the detention of 16 military officers to the purported coup and claimed that the cancellation of the Independence Day military parade was part of efforts to suppress internal unrest in the military.

However, the Defence Headquarters denied the story.

In a statement signed by the Director of Defence Information, Brig. Gen. Tukur Gusau, the military dismissed the report as “false and intended to cause unnecessary tension and distrust among the populace.”

Gusau said the cancellation of the Independence Day parade was “purely administrative” and that the detained officers were being investigated for “issues of indiscipline.”

He maintained that the armed forces remained loyal to the Constitution and to the President.

See also  APC defends Yilwatda amidst fierce opposition over INEC ties

Still, the timing of the service chiefs’ removal — barely days after the coup report — has continued to fuel public suspicion.

Why Tinubu sacked service chiefs — Presidency

Reacting to the speculation, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Tope Ajayi, explained that the move followed two years of sustained operations under the previous chiefs.

He noted that the move reflected the President’s desire “to inject new direction, vision, vigour and energy” into the military.

“This is not a reaction to any rumour of coups. He is exercising his powers. The service chiefs have done two years,” Ajayi told Saturday PUNCH.

“We are fighting security issues — Boko Haram in the North-East, banditry in the North-West, IPOB and ESN in the South-East, kidnapping in the South-West, and other crises in the North-Central,” he added.

Ajayi emphasised that the President’s action was lawful.

He further noted that the country’s heavy security spending in recent years had drained funds from other key sectors.

“In the last 15 years, look at our national budget — security taking the largest chunk. The President wants to deal with this matter once and for all, so that the money going into defence expenditure will be better deployed to fund critical infrastructure like power, roads, broadband, education, and healthcare,” he said.

Ajayi added that the President’s decision was consistent with the constitutional provision that all appointees serve at the President’s pleasure.

“Every appointee of government, whether you are minister, head of agency, or service chief, serves at the pleasure of the President. Nobody has a secure tenure. The only two people in the Federal Government who have a guarantee of tenure are the President and the Vice President,” he explained.

Public suspicion persists

Despite the explanations, speculations linking the shake-up to the rumoured alleged coup plot have continued to grow.

A senior security operative in one of the intelligence agencies told Saturday PUNCH that people connecting the change of service chiefs to the rumored coup attempt “have a point.”

“Information about the matter is not something you can easily get. The official statement of the military is that there was nothing like a coup attempt, and we stay with that.

See also  I Could Have Been Killed During 1966 Coup – Obasanjo Reveals Who Saved Him

“However, those trying to connect the removal of the service chiefs to the denied coup plot also have a point. People will definitely add two and two together and form their opinions,” he said.

On X, Nigerians also drew connections between the timing of the announcement and the reports of arrests within the military.

Ikechukwu Ude said, “There were rumours of a military coup last week, and today some of the military service chiefs were sacked. That the rumour was debunked, but it seems to be true right now from the sack of service chiefs! No civilian with zero capacity can stop military generals if they intend to change any government.”

Another Nigerian, Muduwa Kerra, said the removal of the service chiefs signified how close the country was to a coup.

Similarly, Abraham Uyanna queried, “If there wasn’t an attempted coup, why is there a sudden change of service chiefs?”

ADC demands answers

Meanwhile, the African Democratic Congress has urged President Tinubu to explain the replacement of the nation’s military leadership.

In a statement issued on Friday by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said, “We note that nearly all the service chiefs that have been removed were appointed only 28 months ago, with the current Chief of Defence Staff himself appointed just a year ago as Chief of Army Staff.

“We also note that this kind of decision has serious and far-reaching implications for stability within the ranks and therefore could not have been taken without strong reasons. Our position remains, therefore, that the Federal Government owes Nigerians a categorical explanation about what truly happened.

“As an opposition political party, our interest remains the stability of our country and our democracy. In the light of developments in our neighbourhood of Chad and the Sahel States, we are gravely concerned.”

The ADC observed that the near-total overhaul of the nation’s military leadership was more likely to fuel rumours and conspiracy theories rather than dispel them.

Mixed reactions trail appointments

Also, security experts expressed mixed reactions to the changes.

A former Director of Legal Services at the Nigerian Army, Col. Yomi Dare (retd), described the appointment of the new service chiefs as a morale booster.

See also  Airlines cancel dozens of Caribbean flights after U.S. attacks on Venezuela

He said, “There is no security implication other than that the outgone officers have done their bit. The new service chiefs, by virtue of their appointment, must now be motivated to work effectively. They should assess what their predecessors achieved and, in unspoken words, learn from what they did and failed to do.”

Similarly, a former Director of the Department of State Services, Mike Ejiofor, noted that while the President had the constitutional power to make such changes, the real challenge remained funding and operational conditions.

“For me, changing the service chiefs might not necessarily change anything because they have all been working under very difficult situations,” he said.

“We should also not forget that they are operating under serious financial constraints. People say this year’s budget is the highest in terms of defence, but has it been implemented? The funds have not been released, so they are working in a very tough environment.”

Ejiofor urged the Federal Government to prioritise the release of funds and strengthen coordination among the agencies.

“A foundation has already been laid by the former service chiefs, so the new ones should consolidate on the gains made by their predecessors,” he advised.

On his part, security analyst Akogun-Abudu Oluwamayowa faulted the timing and necessity of the overhaul.

“What is happening in this country in terms of insecurity is not about changing the service chiefs. One of the problems we are facing is that we do not have perimeter fencing. People from other countries come into our country without barriers, wreaking havoc. The change may not be effective when major issues are not tackled,” he said.

He urged the new chiefs to prioritise the welfare of soldiers.

“The best welfare for soldiers is not training but their well-being. Their salaries are not even enough. These people are really suffering. I advise that these new service chiefs fight for the soldiers and pay attention to their welfare,” he said.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

News

Step-by-step guide for contactless passport renewal for Nigerians abroad

Published

on

The Nigeria Immigration Service has released an updated step-by-step guide for Nigerians living abroad to renew their passports through its Contactless Passport Application System.

The Service announced the update in a post on its official X handle on Tuesday, encouraging Nigerians in the diaspora to take advantage of the digital platform.

According to the Service, the application process involves the following steps:

1. Visit the official NIS Passport Application portal.
2. Select Continue from the pop-up window.
3. Click Apply for Renewal/Re-issue.
4. Create an account and verify your identity using your National Identification Number and date of birth.
5. Complete the application form and choose your preferred processing embassy or high commission.
6. Upload the required documents.
7. Pay the passport fee for your selected booklet.
8. Obtain your Application ID and Reference Number.
9. Select the Contactless option under the Application Status/Book Appointment section.
10. Review the contactless instructions and click “I Understand and Opt In.”
11. Download the NIS Mobile App.
12. Log in or create a profile on the app.
13. Select Passport Application Services.
14. Click Passport Biometrics Enrolment, enter your Application ID and Reference Number, and check your eligibility.
15. Capture your facial image and fingerprints.
16. Complete the liveness verification.
17. Pay the contactless service fee.
18. Submit your biometrics.

The Service, however, noted that not all applicants would qualify for the contactless process.

“If response is INELIGIBLE, then it means applicant should return to the landing page of the portal to book physical appointment at the Embassy/High Commission,” it stated.

See also  APC Reps fight back after ticket losses during Primaries

For applicants who successfully complete the contactless biometric enrolment, the NIS said additional documents must be forwarded to the selected processing mission.

“Upon successful completion of biometrics via Contactless App, applicant should print-out the Application form, passport booklet payment, biometric payment, current Passport and enclose all in a self-addressed return envelope to the processing embassy selected during the application process,” the Service said.

It added that applicants would be able to monitor the progress of their applications after submission.

“Applicant may track successful application two weeks after submission via https://track.immigration.gov.ng or on the NIS Mobile App,” the Service added.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

News

PFIPC scandal: Ex-SGF Babachir Lawal suspects ‘big racket’ behind ‘fake’ agency’s budget code

Published

on

A former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Babachir Lawal, has called for a judicial inquiry into the controversy surrounding the alleged fake Presidential Fiscal and Infrastructure Projects Council (PFIPC), arguing that the scandal points to deep institutional failures rather than a simple administrative error.

Speaking in an interview with ARISE NEWS on Monday, Lawal said the circumstances surrounding the alleged agency suggested the existence of a wider network that enabled it to function within government processes despite questions over its legal status.

He insisted that an administrative investigation alone would be insufficient. “I don’t think it should even be administrative alone; it should be a judicial inquiry”, the former SGF clearly stated.

Lawal questioned claims surrounding an alleged ₦27.5bn take-off grant reportedly linked to the agency, asking how such funds could have been approved and released if the organisation had no legal basis.

“Nigerians are talking about how N1.3bn was inserted into the budget. The man himself first said the quarrel came about because he refused to part with 48% of the 27-point-something billion Naira take-off grant. That money has been spent before this budget office was looking for the budget.

“Who gave him the money? It was not appropriated for; it’s not in any budget, that N27.5bn Naira for which he says somebody demanded 48%. Who gave him the money? How did the process of generating the request for the release come up? How did it go through?

“We are just talking about the tip of the iceberg here. Down there, before we got to here, N27.5bn had already been disbursed, according to him, as a take-off grant. How did that money get to him? It was not in the budget. So this is what should frighten us. If such money can go to a fictitious organisation, we only now begin to see it when we are quarrelling about how it got into the budget. How did that money get to them?”, Babachir queried.

See also  I Could Have Been Killed During 1966 Coup – Obasanjo Reveals Who Saved Him

The former SGF argued that the controversy only became public because of disagreements over the sharing of funds rather than because government oversight mechanisms functioned effectively.

He continued,… “So you see, that’s how we got to know this to start with. That is the reason why we got to know this on his side of the coin. It’s about the sharing of the N27.5bn. That’s why the thing came up. So it didn’t work. It should have worked before that money left the government coffers into the account of the agency.”

Lawal also alleged that the scandal reflected broader institutional weaknesses within the current administration, arguing that the Office of the SGF should have detected any irregularities before the matter progressed through official channels.

He maintained that the SGF’s office bears responsibility for identifying and flagging agencies without legal backing before their requests or budgets proceed through government.

He said, “It’s institutional compromise, because in this, I sense there’s quite a big racket going on somewhere along the line. If the agency was created by maybe one big man alone, and then he wants to go through the budget process, the budget office assigns the budget code according to the chart of accounts in GIFMIS. So, how did they manage to assign the budget code for this agency that does not exist? Who inserted it?

“Because first of all, the budget office issues a budget call circular to MDAs, and everybody starts to prepare his budget according to the budget line. They give you ceilings, and you prepare your budget and forward it to the budget office as an agency or ministry. Now, the Ministry of Budget and Planning would, in our time, call every MDA to come and defend its budget. Now, if you don’t exist, how did they recognise that you are a genuine entity? Who gave out the budget code and allowed their budget to pass?

See also  ‘Don’t Speak For Victims, We Need Help’ – Christians Reject Trump’s Claim Of Ending Killings In Nigeria

“That’s what oversight is. The SGF should be able to know, because before it gets to the National Assembly, that budget goes through the SGF. Unless there’s a dereliction of duty by the SGF’s office, the responsibility to flag that this is a fake agency would have come from them.”

Lawal further criticised the National Assembly, accusing lawmakers of failing to thoroughly scrutinise budget proposals.

“It is a legislative oversight. This government—this National Assembly—has no interest in scrutinising the budget that comes before them. Most of the legislators just go in there to earn their salaries and collect allowances and go. They don’t scrutinise the budget line by line. We all know how this particular government works. There are some people that when they talk, nobody else has the authority to contravene.”

He also suggested that public attention should focus not only on the agency’s legal status but on the individuals who allegedly enabled its operations.

“Why are you interested in N27.5bn that had already been collected and spent? We are talking about an agency that we are claiming doesn’t exist. Maybe it exists, but it doesn’t have a legal framework for its existence. But it exists. And there are a lot of powerful people that make sure it exists in that form.

“Those are the people we need to expose. The Chief of Staff, in particular, is so powerful. The SGF is there, just reneging on his responsibilities. And nothing has happened now”, he concluded.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

 

See also  Kogi school attack: 17 pupils rescued, nine still in captivity

Continue Reading

News

Fake Agency Scandal: Gbajabiamila threatens Adeyemi with N10bn defamation suit

Published

on

Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, ha threatened to initiate legal steps against Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, and demand N10 billion in damages over allegations linking him to murder, bribery and other criminal activities.

The move was conveyed in a letter dated July 6, 2026, signed by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Kemi Pinheiro, on behalf of Pinheiro LP, the Chief of Staff’s legal representatives.

The dispute stems from a press conference held by Adeyemi on June 25, during which he accused Gbajabiamila of seeking a share of the alleged take-off funds of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), receiving money through intermediaries, abusing his office and participating in efforts to conceal wrongdoing.Death & Tragedy

During the briefing, Adeyemi also referred to the Chief of Staff as “a murderer” and “an assassin”.

The Presidency has consistently maintained that the PFIPC is a fictitious organisation, despite its appearance in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

Gbajabiamila’s lawyers dismissed all the allegations as entirely false and defamatory, saying they were intended to damage his reputation.

The letter stated: “not only false but gravely defamatory,” adding that the allegations were “designed to portray our client as corrupt, dishonest, criminally culpable, morally bankrupt, administratively incompetent, a murderer and unfit to occupy public office.”

According to the legal team, Adeyemi is already standing trial before the Federal High Court in Abuja in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/652/2026, FRN v. Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew & Ors, over allegations including forgery of an appointment letter bearing Gbajabiamila’s purported signature and the alleged counterfeiting of Presidential letter-headed papers to present himself as a government official.Nigeria Investment Guide

See also  Naira could hit N1,100 to $1 in 2026, says Dangote

The lawyers further rejected Adeyemi’s claims that Gbajabiamila demanded 48 per cent of a purported N27.4 billion take-off grant for the council, amounting to about N12.5 billion, or that he received N400 million through proxies connected to appointments within the organisation.

Other allegations dismissed in the letter included claims that the Chief of Staff intimidated individuals and media organisations, manipulated budget processes, attempted to misuse security agencies and performed official duties while under the influence of intoxicating substances.Trending News Feed

Gbajabiamila also denied ever having any relationship with Adeyemi.

“You have never at any time met, interacted with, communicated with, or had any form of personal or official dealing whatsoever with him,” the lawyers wrote, adding that the decision to “fabricate and publish allegations against a person with whom you have had absolutely no relationship or interaction underscores the reckless, baseless and malicious nature of your publication.”

The legal team also criticised the timing of the allegations, noting that they were made after criminal proceedings had already been instituted against Adeyemi.

“It is even more disturbing to our client that you resorted to defaming him through your press statements after a criminal Charge had been filed against you,” the letter stated.

It added, “Trial by media remains unknown to Nigerian law and cannot be a substitute for due process.”Nigeria Investment Guide

Gbajabiamila’s lawyers demanded that Adeyemi immediately stop making further defamatory statements, remove all related videos, recordings and transcripts from every platform, issue a full retraction and apology in at least five national newspapers and across all social media platforms used to circulate the claims, and provide a written undertaking that he would refrain from making further allegations.

See also  FULL LIST: Nigeria ranked 36th world’s most corrupt country in 2025

The letter warned that failure to comply would result in both criminal defamation proceedings under the laws of the Federal Capital Territory and a civil lawsuit seeking N10 billion in aggravated and exemplary damages. The damages, it said, would be donated to a charity chosen by Gbajabiamila. The legal action would also seek a perpetual injunction and a court order compelling the publication of an apology.

The controversy centres on the PFIPC, which was listed in the 2026 Appropriation Act under the title Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and received more than N1.3 billion in budgetary allocations, including about N803 million for personnel, N200 million for overhead and N300 million for capital expenditure.

Adeyemi had argued during his June 25 press conference that an agency included in a budget signed by the President could not be regarded as non-existent.

However, the Presidency insists the council is fraudulent and has no legal existence.

Meanwhile, human rights lawyer Femi Falana has argued that the Presidency lacks the constitutional authority to clear anyone involved in the dispute and has called for an independent investigation into the allegations against both Gbajabiamila and Adeyemi.

Adeyemi is scheduled to appear before the Federal High Court on July 27, 2026.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending