Connect with us

News

India, others reject Tinubu’s envoys, see why

Published

on

India and other yet-to-be disclosed countries have declined to accept some of President Bola Tinubu’s recently posted ambassadors-designate due to diplomatic policies that discourage receiving envoys from administrations with less than two years remaining in office, The PUNCH has gathered.

High-ranking officials in the Presidency and the foreign service disclosed on Tuesday that India, where career diplomat Ambassador Muhammad Dahiru has been designated to serve, maintains a standing policy against accepting ambassadors from governments with tenures of less than two years remaining.

Our correspondent gathered that the Asian giant is exercising its discretionary powers to turn down the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ request to accept Dahiru’s posting.

The development confirms an earlier exclusive report by this newspaper in February 2026, in which sources revealed that storms were brewing for many of Tinubu’s ambassador-designates who faced the prospect of rejection by host countries due to time constraints on their tenure.

Three separate sources familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of diplomatic negotiations, said the Federal Government was already receiving signals from New Delhi and possibly other capitals about their reluctance to grant agrément.

Agrément is the formal approval given by a receiving country to accept a diplomat designated by the sending country, and it is a prerequisite before an ambassador can assume duty.

“They don’t accept an ambassador from an administration that has less than two years in office. So they are giving us that body language already,” a Presidency official told our correspondent.

The source continued, “Some countries are reluctant to accept some people, not because of the individuals but because of time. They are already seeing the Tinubu government as an outgoing government.

“So their concern is that he has just one year left, so what if he doesn’t win the election? Another government may come and remove them. We also understand that some countries have this policy. Any ambassador from an administration that has less than a year or two in office will not get accepted. And one of such countries is India.”

A second source, a senior foreign service official, confirmed India’s position but expressed hope that Nigeria could leverage its relationship with New Delhi to secure an exception.

See also  Veteran Nollywood Actor, Victor Eriabie, Is De@d

“I know India has that policy. If you are less than two years to the end of the tenure, there will be difficulties accepting an ambassador. Maybe we can leverage our relationship with them to scale through that.

“Of course, there are those among them who gauge political tides, and some may see that this government can win the next election. Perhaps they may see that the election may not be so competitive because virtually everybody has moved towards the APC. They may say the chances for APC’s victory are high. That is one of the arguments the government will push forward,” the official said.

The source emphasised that while India is the only country with a confirmed policy against short-tenure ambassadors, other nations may follow similar conventions.

“India is the only one I can confirm to you for now. The others will be based on their conventions and practices. But the one I know for sure now is India. We will have to do a lot of convincing because they have a standing rule,” the official stated.

A third official disclosed that while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had secured funding for the mandatory induction course for ambassadors-designate, the timeline remains uncertain.

“On the training, we don’t know when for now. But the Foreign Ministry has the funds already to undertake the induction course,” the source said.

President Tinubu, on Friday, March 6, approved the postings of 65 ambassadors-designate and high commissioners to various countries and the United Nations, with Ambassador Dahiru assigned to serve in New Delhi.

Among the 65 nominees are former Aviation Minister Femi Fani-Kayode (Germany), presidential aide Reno Omokri (Mexico), former Katsina State Governor Lt Gen Abdulrahman Dambazzau (China), and Senator Jimoh Ibrahim (UN Permanent Representative).

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has so far only received agrément from the United Kingdom for High Commissioner-designate Aminu Dalhatu and from France for Amb Ayodele Oke, leaving the fate of the remaining 63 envoys uncertain.

The Independent National Electoral Commission has scheduled the next presidential election for January 16, 2027. Tinubu’s first tenure is set to conclude in May that year.

In an earlier report, our correspondent had gathered that several countries may insist that ambassadors have a minimum tenured period of a year or two tied to the life of the sending country’s administration.

See also  Jonathan considers comeback for 2027 as court hears eligibility suit today

A highly-placed foreign service official had then disclosed, “The problem we have, which we are trying at the moment to see what we can do about, is that most countries, like India, will tell you that if an ambassador has less than one year or two, they may have issues.

“Usually, one year counts to the end of any current administration. So, that is where there might be a challenge. By the time they get the agrément, some of these ambassadors will have just a few months left.”

The official noted that some ambassadors may not commence their tours of duty until August 2026, which would leave them with barely nine months before the next election.

“Some people may not go before August because some countries will take their time to do background checks. When you send the name, sometimes they will respond, ‘Send someone else.’ And when you insist on asking why, they will give you their own report of their background checks. Or they may just ignore you for six months,” the official disclosed.

Under Article 4 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, receiving states must grant consent before any ambassador can be accredited.

In an interview with our correspondent, Nigeria’s former envoy to Singapore, Amb Ogbole Amedu-Ode, said receiving states were only being pragmatic by considering Nigeria’s political calendar before accepting an envoy.

“The underlying word here is pragmatism. Those receiving states are just being pragmatic if they take that view because the next round of general elections is in a year from now, in February and March.

“The question is now about an envoy from a president who is facing an election in a year. Elections, no matter how we think we understand them, can go either way.

“So, why receive letters of credence from a principal envoy from a President who has just one year and some months remaining for his first term in office? So, they may dilly-dally in issuing an agrément,” Amedu-Ode said.

See also  Oyo NUT strike leaves pupils idle, parents raise concerns

He described the administration’s delay in nominating ambassadors as a mistake.

“The mistake has been made by the current administration already because they shouldn’t have waited two to three years into their term before nomination, screening, and deployment of heads of missions.”

However, Nigeria’s former envoy to Algeria, Mohammed Mabdul, had noted that friendly nations were unlikely to reject Nigerian nominees outright but drew a distinction between career and political appointees.

“The political appointees are the problem. Once received and accredited, they are usually expected to remain for two to three years. But with the next election in just a year now, there is the possibility that they may start returning to participate in campaigns. So, they may not make any serious impact with their posting,” Mabdul stated.

The diplomatic impasse may further delay Tinubu’s last-ditch efforts to restore full ambassadorial representation abroad 27 months after he recalled all 83 career and non-career ambassadors in September 2023 and left the country’s 109 missions without substantive heads.

Since assuming office, the Tinubu administration has strengthened ties with India.

The President visited India in September 2023 to attend the G20 Summit in New Delhi as a guest nation, where he met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to discuss bilateral cooperation in defence, agriculture, trade, and investment.

Just over a year later, in November 2024, Modi made his first visit to Nigeria in 17 years, the first by an Indian prime minister since 2007.

During the two-day visit, the leaders signed Memoranda of Understanding on cultural exchange, customs cooperation, and survey cooperation, and discussed expanding the India-Nigeria Strategic Partnership established in 2007.

Tinubu bestowed upon Modi Nigeria’s second-highest national honour, the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, making him only the second foreign dignitary after Queen Elizabeth II to receive the award.

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  FG begins payment of doctors arrears

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  Late Olubadan, Oba Olakulehin, laid to rest with military honours

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  FG begins payment of doctors arrears

“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  FG unveils poverty intelligence hub to target 140 million poor Nigerians

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  Petrol price soars 643% in three years

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  EFCC detains Energy Commission DG; read why

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