Connect with us

News

VIPs move to engage NSCDC after 11,000 policemen were recalled

Published

on

Following the withdrawal of 11,566 policemen by the authorities, prominent Nigerians have revealed plans to apply to the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps for orderlies and security escorts.

The move, ordered by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is part of an aggressive push to redirect overstretched security manpower to escalating nationwide threats—including kidnapping spikes in Kwara, Kebbi, Niger and other parts of the North.

Addressing journalists in Abuja, Inspector-General of Police Kayode Egbetokun said the recall of police from VIP duties was neither punitive nor political but was designed to refocus policing on communities ravaged by crime.

“In line with the President’s directive, we have withdrawn a total of 11,566 personnel from VIP protection. These officers are being redeployed to critical policing duties immediately,” he announced.

Egbetokun said the reallocation will strengthen rural and township security, improve intelligence-led operations, and boost rapid response capacity.

He warned that the implementation must be guarded against abuse by criminals posing as law enforcement agents.

“The withdrawal is not a retreat from responsibility, but a reclamation of it.”

The IGP also cited recent abductions in Kwara, Kebbi, and Niger states as justification for redeploying officers from VIP corridors to troubled zones.

Among recent successes, Egbetokun said the police arrested 451 suspects for armed robbery, 356 for kidnapping, 534 murder suspects, 129 for culpable homicide suspects, 173 persons for unlawful possession of firearms, 312 rape suspects and 282 suspected cultists.

Despite the sweeping directive, police insiders told The PUNCH that many officers had quietly resumed VIP assignments

A source who doesn’t want to be named because he was not permitted to speak to journalists said some of his colleagues on VIP duties are back.

“Those on VIPs’ duties are returning. I saw some of them today. In my office, two of them are back. This time around I think the directive will be effective with what I have seen on the ground, “one source said.

Another police official, speaking on condition of anonymity, added, “ Officers are being reassigned to their previous duties gradually. I don’t know the VIPs they were withdrawn from but our colleagues are returning. “

Findings by The PUNCH revealed that several political bigwigs—among them former SDP presidential candidate Prince Adewole Adebayo and suspended PDP National Secretary Samuel Anyanwu—were among VIPs whose police details were abruptly recalled.

At a high-profile meeting in the Central Business District on Thursday morning, The PUNCH spotted the former SDP standard-bearer flanked by NSCDC personnel alongside armed private guards dressed in black. Efforts made to reach Adebayo to confirm the withdrawal of his police escorts were unsuccessful as his line was unavailable.

Meanwhile, suspended PDP National Secretary, Samuel Anyanwu, admitted that his police orderlies had also been withdrawn.

Speaking in a phone interview on Thursday, he expressed support for the policy, but urged the government to prioritise “elder statesmen and national officers of political parties.”

“I support their withdrawal. Nigeria as a government is lacking in terms of manpower in the police. The police officers who are engaged with the VIPs have also mismanaged that position.”

However, he added a caveat: “They should prioritise it. They should know the calibre of people and take a look at their potential to be able to know who really meets the requirements of VIPs. They should do a proper recording and documentation of these police officers.”

Asked if he would turn to private guards, he replied, “How can I be using private guards? I’m entitled to police escorts. I’m a national official of a political party and also a senator. But I have applied to the NSCDC for manpower. In fact, I even prefer them because they are well trained too.”

See also  Tinubu orders manhunt as terrorists kill over 40 in Niger

Vice Chairman of the APC (South-East), Dr Ijeoma Arodiogbu, warned that depriving VIPs of protection could backfire.

“No, they didn’t withdraw my security aides. That’s one. In the House of Reps and the Senate yesterday (Wednesday), they spoke against that, because if they withdraw security aides from VIPs, it could be another level of insecurity.

“Of course, VIPs are prime targets, especially with politicians. So, I don’t think that the IGP will implement all of it. Of course, it is big news if any VIP is affected by any form of insecurity. That is why it’s called VIP, Very Important Personality,” he said.

While thanking the president for taking the bold moves, the APC chieftain also backed the call for priority to be given to certain VIPs, saying escorts should not be given to everyone.

“I agree with giving priority to certain persons of importance. In everything, prioritising is important. We shouldn’t be having a situation where some traders will be seen going about with 10 police details.

“Yes, we agreed that they have money. But they shouldn’t fall under the bracket or category of the elite who cogently need these escort and security aides. That is the one that is more disturbing.

“We also thank the president so much for calling for more recruitment of personnel into the police and army. It is all a bid to buffer all those challenges.”

According to him, priority should be given to truly high-risk individuals—not traders “going around with 10 police officers.”

The  Deputy National Youth Leader of the PDP, Tim Osadolor, said Nigerians should embrace a future where VIPs move without escorts.

“Let everybody including the president learn to start moving around without them. Let Tinubu travel to Amsterdam and Denmark and see how their prime ministers move around freely without escorts.”

Meanwhile, the lawmaker representing Borno South, Senator Ali Ndume, has thrown his weight behind the withdrawal of police personnel from Very Important Persons.

Speaking on Thursday night on Politics Today, a programme on Channels Television, Ndume said some ministers had police officers attached not only to themselves but also to their wives and children.

He said he had long advocated the policy, describing it as one of President Bola Tinubu’s most commendable decisions, which must be fully implemented.

“We should see it on the ground. I thought I would not see policemen at the National Assembly today but I saw so many of them there today.

“I was given three police orderlies, but that was a big crowd for me so I refused. I insisted that if there’s going to be any attachment of the police to me, then it should be one orderly because I’m not an accused person.

“I should have police to monitor me so that next time they won’t say I have gone to have a meeting with the other person. So I need that police to monitor my movement and who I relate with. The police are not to protect me. No.

“So, I am of the opinion that all these policemen be withdrawn from VIPs. You can imagine that some of my colleagues like ministers have police attached to their wives and children. What’s their business with that?” he queried.

See also  Peace talks: Iran has rejected our terms – US VP, JD Vance

But some lawmakers described the directive as “unrealistic” and “potentially reckless,” insisting that VIPs remain primary targets of assassinations and politically motivated attacks.

The Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, Prof Julius Ihonvbere,  called for clarification on the category of persons affected by the recent presidential directive ordering the withdrawal of police orderlies from Very Important Persons.

Speaking exclusively with The PUNCH, Ihonvbere said that although he does not consider himself a VIP, his position as a national officer requires police protection.

He stated, “We have to define those this policy will affect. I am not a VIP but a national officer of Nigeria. All over the world, presidents and other key government functionaries are protected by the police.

“In my own case, I can fly to Benin City, Edo State, but I cannot move without police from Benin City to my constituency. This is because that road is a danger zone where kidnappers hold sway.

“If I’m going to my constituency, will I go without security? I think the government should clarify this so that it will be clear for us to know who are affected by this development. I want to repeat that there are VIPs and public officers.”

The Professor of Political Science also lamented the abuse of police orderlies, especially by individuals with financial influence.

“Not long ago, a private citizen visited me. He came from the United States to do business in Nigeria. He had six police guards with him. This is something we need to look at,” he added.

In a separate interview, Edo lawmaker, Billy Osawaru said he is “now on his own,” without elaborating on what he intends to do going forward.

Asked if his police guard had been withdrawn, he replied, “Yes and I’m on my own.”

The lawmaker representing Osun East in the Senate, Francis Fadahunsi,  urged the National Assembly to enact a law that would enable responsible Nigerians to bear arms, especially now that the country is grappling with worsening security challenges.

A short video of the lawmaker’s admonition at plenary was obtained by PUNCH Online in Osogbo, Osun State, on Thursday.

Fadahunsi, a lawmaker belonging to the All Progressives Congress, while advancing arguments on the need to allow responsible Nigerians to bear arms, said about 120 countries across the globe have legalised arm bearing by the people.

“We are almost at military rule, and we are at war. He (Tinubu) is the Commander-in-Chief because they listen to him and he is spending on them. That is what can solve the problem.

“Today, about 120 countries have legalised carrying arms. I think it is time for Nigeria to allow us to carry arms.

“If the elite and a few of us who are okay are carrying guns, it will be a war against these criminals, and they will run away because they are not many,” Fadahunsi said.

On the part of the National Assembly, the Senator said, “It is time for us to make a law that the kidnappers, including the negotiators, are criminals and should face the death penalty.”

Demanding a reorganisation of the country’s military architecture, the lawmaker queried the command structure of the Ministry of Defence.

He said, “The Minister of Defence is not a soldier or a retired general. The Minister of State, all of them are businessmen. The NSA is a retired policeman.

“Do you know that these soldiers called us, even those carrying superior guns than theirs, ‘bloody civilians’, and that is what is affecting us.

See also  Jonathan cleared for 2027 elections as Turaki PDP hails court verdict; read details

“The Commander-in -Chief needs to look at the military architecture around him and do the needful. If not, we will continue to waste money because they will not take orders from any other person other than their own general.”

Barely 24 hours after Fadahunsi’s comments, the Senate introduced a bill sponsored by Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele to classify all forms of kidnapping as terrorism, attracting a mandatory death sentence.

The Senate on Thursday introduced a bill seeking sweeping amendments to the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, less than 24 hours after lawmakers demanded tougher sanctions to curb the rising wave of insecurity across the country.

Sponsored by the Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele (APC, Ekiti Central), the bill, which sailed through first reading immediately, proposes to classify all forms of kidnapping as acts of terrorism, attracting the maximum penalty of death upon conviction.

The move followed a heated debate during Wednesday’s plenary, where senators lamented the worsening spate of abductions nationwide.

Many lawmakers argued that only the stiffest punishment would deter the growing menace. They called for the death penalty for kidnapping, irrespective of whether the victim dies in captivity.

Presiding over the session, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, directed Bamidele to submit an amendment bill “as soon as practicable,” stressing the urgency of the matter.

“A very serious amendment has been proposed, that the penalty for kidnapping be changed immediately to carry the maximum punishment of death,” Akpabio said.

“Henceforth, kidnapping should first be classified as a terrorist act, which should attract the death penalty. Once the offence is established, a death sentence must follow. There is no discretion,” he added.

Bamidele complied with the directive on Thursday, presenting the bill for its first reading.

The proposed amendment, however, seeks to broaden the scope by defining any form of kidnapping as terrorism, making the death penalty mandatory upon conviction, whether or not the victim survives the ordeal.

Meanwhile, the Association of Licensed Private Security Practitioners of Nigeria has described the new development as a wake-up call to modernise the 38-year-old law regulating private security operations.

The association said the current legal framework governing the private security industry is outdated and inadequate for addressing emerging threats.

Addressing journalists on Thursday, the Chairman of ALPSPN’s Interim Caretaker Management Committee, Maj. Gen. Elvis Njoku (retd.), said updating the Act had become necessary to professionalise the sector, standardise operations, and integrate private security firms more effectively into national security planning.

“We are pushing for amendments to the Private Guard Companies Act to incorporate modern security paradigms, such as data protection and environmental security. Our united front will make these demands irresistible, benefiting not just our members but the entire nation.

“The private security industry in Nigeria is at a pivotal juncture. We have witnessed remarkable growth in recent years, with our members providing essential services in areas ranging from corporate security, event management, VIP protection, to community surveillance,”he added.

Njoku explained that the association is seeking provisions that address new security realities, including data protection, technological surveillance tools, and expanded responsibilities for licensed practitioners.

He urged members to unite behind the push for legislative reforms, noting that a coordinated front would strengthen the industry’s advocacy efforts.

He also praised President Tinubu’s security reforms.

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  Pipeline vandals deploy CCTV, advanced tactics to evade arrest – Expert

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  Tinubu’s Executive Order: FG, states, LGs allocation may increase by N15tn

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  NASS to harmonise Electoral Bill Monday

“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  Peter Obi would win northern states if he returns to PDP – Jerry Gana

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  Hamzat, Yayi, Alli may emerge APC consensus gov candidates

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  Fubara pledges to continue serving people’s interests in Rivers

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