Connect with us

News

US visa shockwave: Trump order may delay 5,000 intending Nigerian immigrants

Published

on

No fewer than 5,000 intending Nigerian immigrants to the United States may be delayed following the new visa restrictions imposed on Nigeria and 74 other countries by President Donald Trump on Wednesday.

Data from the US consulate in Lagos show that 5,626 immigrant visas were issued in 2023, up from 4,219 in 2022—an increase of 1,407 visas within a year.

An analysis by The PUNCH indicates that at least 5,000 immigrant visas granted to Nigerians annually could be affected by the latest measure, which seeks to restrict the entry of foreigners intending to live in the United States.

Additionally, a total of 70,621 Nigerians were issued U.S. immigrant and non-immigrant visas in 2024.

A breakdown reveals that 63,313 non-immigrant visas were issued to Nigerians, with Abuja accounting for 30,222, while 33,091 were issued in Lagos. Also, 7,308 persons obtained US immigrant visas during the period.

Confirming the development, a State Department spokesperson said, “The State Department is pausing immigrant visa processing for 75 countries.”

The pause will begin on January 21 and will continue indefinitely until the review is complete.

The policy forms part of a wider entry suspension affecting countries regarded by Washington as posing screening and vetting difficulties or producing migrants who rely excessively on public benefits.

The latest development comes barely a week after the Trump administration imposed a visa bond requirement of up to $15,000 on nationals from 38 countries, including Nigeria, effective January 21, 2026.

The policy targets countries with high visa overstay rates and security concerns.

The State Department in a post on X on Wednesday announced the pause of immigrant visa processing from 75 countries, which it claimed the migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates.

The post read, “The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from 75 countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates. The freeze will remain active until the U.S. can ensure that new immigrants will not extract wealth from the American people.

‘’The pause impacts dozens of countries – including Somalia, Haiti, Iran, and Eritrea – whose immigrants often become public charges on the United States upon arrival. We are working to ensure the generosity of the American people will no longer be abused. The Trump Administration will always put America First.”

See also  Blackout looms as gas shortfall hits power stations

The affected countries include 27 African countries, 22 Asian countries, 8 European countries, 13 North American and Caribbean countries, three South American countries and one Oceania.

They are Algeria, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Libya, Morocco, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda and Yemen.

Others are Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma, Cambodia, Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Syria, Thailand and Uzbekistan.

Also on the list are Albania, Belarus, Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Russia, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Cuba, Dominica, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent, Grenadines, Brazil, Colombia, Uruguay and Fiji.

State Department data show that global immigrant visa issuance climbed to 612,258 in 2024, up from 562,976 in 2023. Non-immigrant visa issuance also rose from 10,438,327 in 2023 to 10,969,936 in 2024.

The report further puts the global migrant visa issuance at 240,526 for the year 2020; 285,069 in 2021; 493,448 in 2022;  562,976 in 2023, and 612,258 in 2024.

Non-immigrant categories for 2020 were recorded as 4,013,210;  2, 792,083 for 2021; 6,815,120 in 2022; 10,438,327 in 2023, while  10,969,936 were recorded in 2024.

Meanwhile, in December, the US previously announced a partial visa ban on Nigeria alongside other countries.

In relation to Nigeria, the US policy cited persistent security challenges and overstays on temporary visas.

Referencing radical extremist activity in parts of the country, the proclamation stated that such conditions “create substantial screening and vetting difficulties.”

It also referenced overstay rates contained in US government reports.

Consequently, the proclamation ordered that “the entry into the United States of nationals of Nigeria as immigrants, and as non-immigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.”

It further directed consular officers to reduce the validity period for any other non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerian nationals.

See also  Electoral Act 2026: Tinubu defends assent, opposition raises hell

The State Department stressed that visas already issued before the effective date of the proclamation would not be revoked under the new policy.

However, Nigerians outside the United States without valid visas at the time of implementation would be directly affected by the entry suspension.

Reacting to the restriction,  former Nigerian Ambassador to Mexico, Ogbole Amedu-Ode, described the sweeping ban as a contradiction of America’s long-standing advocacy for the free movement of people and ideas.

“It is unfortunate that the apostle of globalisation is the one now engaging what I’ll call a reverse gear as far as the globalisation phenomenon is concerned. Even as he views this as being in America’s interest to keep some countries or citizens of certain countries out of his national territory.”

He criticised the scale of the measure, stating that it is unbecoming to ban 75 countries’ citizens from travelling to the United States.

According to him, “Migration and immigration are as old as the human race, and for the US under Donald Trump to begin to rev up the anti-migration, anti-immigration policies which we are witnessing now is not helping to solve matters as far as human-to-human contacts are concerned.”

Amedu-Ode added that travel is a natural human activity, stressing, “In view of the fact that travelling between countries is natural to the human person, especially in this age now of ease of travel by air, by road, by ship, it’s unfortunate.”

Ex-Ambassador Godknows Igali acknowledged Washington’s sovereign right to set its immigration policies, but urged the US to weigh the implications for bilateral relations.

“Well, it’s America’s right,  America has the right. These are issues of the right of countries. They are determining the conditions of their visas, but again, you have to consider your relationship with other countries. Between Nigeria and the US, we have a very robust relationship that has gone on for many, many decades,” he said.

He emphasised Nigerians’ positive contributions to US society, noting,  “Nigerians have given a good account of themselves in the US,  very disciplined, very hardworking. Almost all Nigerians are doing very well in the US. So, they are not a liability to the system.”

See also  LASWA raises alarm over 611 sub-standard boats on Lagos waterways

He added, “Most Nigerians who go to the US are skilled; we don’t go there as a liability. We are hardworking, we are creative, we are industrious, we are enterprising.’’

He urged sustained diplomacy, saying, “We advise the Nigerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to sustain discussion with them so that Nigeria can be removed from that list.”

Foreign affairs analyst Charles Onunaiju said the latest restriction reflects a deeper shift in US domestic politics and global posture.

“If you look at the United States and see what’s going on there with the so-called ICE picking up people in the streets, you could see chaos in US cities with these issues about immigration. So, it is not a surprise the extent to which the United States could go,” he said.

Onunaiju warned that the present period “is not a normal time” in US foreign relations, observing that even close allies have been affected.

“Recently, the United States imposed a visa ban on key European officials. So, I think the worst has not happened yet. There could be more tightening. People should anticipate that. Mr Trump campaigned and won on the basis of extremist anti-immigration posturing, and he is leveraging that.”

He added that Nigerians should “prepare for the worst”, stressing that the US President had recently stated that he did not recognise international law and was guided only by his “private morality.”

“We have to acknowledge that this is not a normal time and anything is possible between the United States and the rest of the world.”

Ex-ambassador Rasheed Akinkoulie observed that the sweeping ban did not apply to Nigerians applying for visas, arguing that the conditions are simply more stringent, citing the $15,000 visa bond.

‘’Government officials and diplomats who have to travel to the USA are still granted visas without any problem.”

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

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  LASWA raises alarm over 611 sub-standard boats on Lagos waterways

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  Blackout looms as gas shortfall hits power stations

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  SERAP urges FG to probe security votes diversion

“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  Electoral Act 2026: Tinubu defends assent, opposition raises hell

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  Electoral Act 2026: Tinubu defends assent, opposition raises hell

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  DSS frees Ogun pastor, associates after public outcry

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