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  Shiites Hold Abuja Rally To Mourn Iran’s Supreme Leader

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  PDP consensus deal shatters as Lamido rejects Turaki as chairman

“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  PDP crisis: Wike camp rejects zoning talks with Makinde, Diri

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

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  Sultan backs Sharia law in Oyo, Ekiti

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  Healthcare agencies, Red Cross train data collectors to boost immunisation in Anambra

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  FG spends N75bn on arms amid worsening insecurity

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  Healthcare agencies, Red Cross train data collectors to boost immunisation in Anambra

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  FRSC deploys 650 personnel for year-end road campaign in Imo

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  Tinubu brokers French military assistance deal to fight terrorism

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  See why Jonathan may not be eligible to contest in 2027

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  Delta gov urges LG leaders to drive development, curb insecurity

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

Trending