Connect with us

News

Presidency Explains Nigeria-UK Migration Agreement, Warns Against Misinformation

Published

on

UK Trade Envoy, Florence Eshalomi and Nigeria’s Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji Ojo

The Bola Ahmed Tinubu-led administration has clarified details surrounding the migration partnership between Nigeria and the United Kingdom, dismissing claims that the agreement compels Nigeria to accept foreign nationals.

It was reports that the clarification was contained in a statement issued by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga.

According to the Presidency, the Memorandum of Understanding signed during the visit of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu does not require Nigeria to receive non-citizens.

The statement emphasised that only verified nationals of each country would be repatriated under the agreement.

“Nowhere in the 12-page memorandum is Nigeria required to accept foreign nationals other than Nigerians,” the statement said.

The MoU, signed by Nigeria’s Minister of Interior and the UK Home Secretary, is aimed at promoting safe, orderly, and regulated migration between both countries.

The presidency noted that it also seeks to strengthen cooperation in tackling irregular migration and related offences.

The government explained that returnees must undergo multiple layers of identification and verification before repatriation.

Where errors occur, such individuals would be returned to the requesting country at its own cost, the presidency noted.

Onanuga said the agreement provides that all returnees must be treated with dignity and respect, in line with international human rights standards, adding that it also allows individuals to appeal deportation decisions under applicable domestic and international laws.

The Presidency stressed that Nigeria has not ceded control over its immigration processes, pointing out that under the agreement, the Nigeria Immigration Service retains sole authority to issue travel documents and manage all entry procedures.

The full statement reads: “It has become necessary to debunk the raft of misinformation assailing the migration partnership between Nigeria and the United Kingdom, as contained in the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the two nations on the sidelines of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s historic state visit to the UK.

“The memorandum on immigration cooperation, like other memoranda signed, aimed to strengthen the partnership between Nigeria and the United Kingdom.

“Nigeria’s Minister of Interior and the Secretary of State for the Home Department of the Government of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland signed the Migration MoU.

See also  Tuggar demands unedited airing of Piers Morgan interview, rejects Christian persecution claims

“The MoU establishes a framework to facilitate a regulated and safe migration flow between the two countries and to encourage further bilateral cooperation in the fight against irregular migration and associated acts by citizens of each country, in accordance with their respective immigration and citizenship laws and extant international treaties, conventions, protocols, agreements, and charters.

“Nowhere in the 12-page memorandum is Nigeria required to accept foreign nationals other than Nigerians. Nationals to be repatriated must have undergone multiple levels of identification and verification, and, where errors occur, they are returned to the requesting country at the requesting country’s cost.

“Under the agreement, Nigeria and the United Kingdom will work together to secure the dignified return of their nationals who do not, or no longer, have the right to enter or remain in the territory of the other country.

“A clear condition in the MoU is that the returnees concerned are bona fide nationals of the country and are treated with dignity and respect, with due regard to their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

“Law enforcement officers in each country will take the necessary action to protect the interests and well-being of citizens of either party and to mitigate conflict triggers related to migration matters.

“A key provision in the MoU is that the migrant to be returned must carry his legally acquired personal belongings to the country of destination, unlike in the past when migrants left with nothing.

“Article 12 further reinforces this good deal: “Every returnee will be given ample opportunity to make adequate arrangements for the transfer or disposal of his property in the territory of the requesting party, under the supervision of the mission of the requested party.”

“Another provision is that where a return is being considered, and the person has made a claim under relevant domestic or international human rights legislation, that claim will be considered in line with the provisions under the party’s respective domestic legislation. The appeal may relate to circumstances in which the foreign nationals have been lawfully resident in the territory of the requesting party for most of their lives and socially and culturally integrated in the territory of the requesting party. Another ground of appeal may be where the nationals would face significant obstacles to their integration into the country to which they are to be deported.

See also  Tinubu to inaugurate $400m Rivers crude export terminal

“Article 9 of the MoU sets out the conditions for the migrant’s return.

“Before departure, identification checks will be carried out by the officers of the requested party in the territory of the requesting party and on arrival by the competent authorities of the requested party. The requesting party will coordinate all returns with the officers of the requested party.

“A return may be conducted by means of a scheduled aircraft or an aircraft chartered specifically for this purpose by the authorities of the parties; the requesting party will provide the flight details and particulars of each returnee five (5) working days before the date of return.

“A return will be conducted using an original, valid passport, or, if the requesting party can biometrically match a returnee to a visa application made in the territory of the requested party, then an expedited process will be permissible, via which the requesting party will facilitate the return or repatriation using a UK Letter (UKL).

“If a returnee cannot be biometrically matched to a visa application by the requesting party, but there is otherwise strong evidence to confirm nationality, including a copy of a passport, a passport number or a national identity card, then an expedited process will again be permissible via which the requesting party will facilitate return or repatriation using a UK Letter (UKL).

“Should the requested party not be satisfied with a returnee’s identity within five (5) working days of submission of the UK Letter (UKL) to Nigerian authorities, detailed reasons should be presented to the requesting party why the identity cannot be satisfied. In these circumstances, removal will be deferred.

“If subsequent evidence shows that a returnee who has been returned is not a national of the requested party, the requesting party will take the person back to its territory at the requesting party’s cost and by the most efficient means possible. The request for the return of the person referred to in Article X will be made within ten (10) working days following the return exercise and carried out within fourteen (14) working days after acceptance of the request.”

See also  Navy deploys ships, helicopters against maritime crimes

“Article 9, subsection 3, shows that Nigeria has not ceded to the UK the right to document the repatriated person.

“The section says: It shall be the sole responsibility of the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) to issue and handle, as is necessary under Nigerian domestic legislation, any Nigerian documentation (including the digital acknowledgement of receipt of a UK Letter) ahead of the notified date of return as stated in the UK Letter. This shall be distinct from the UK Letter process and remains the sole right and responsibility of Nigerian authorities, including the handling of the
travel document and any onward transmission required from the issuing office to enable entry.

“Article 11 deals with returnee reintegration assistance. It states that every returnee will be able to access basic on-arrival and reintegration assistance in the territory of the requested party.

“Short-term assistance may include airport reception, accommodation, onward transportation, care and provision packs and small cash assistance. Medium-term assistance can include support to find and reunite with family; support in obtaining the in-country documentation required, signposting to local services, and the potential provision of mental well-being and counselling services (if required).

“Longer-term assistance may allow access to a Returnee Education and Entrepreneurship Fund to enable sustainable reintegration. Support may include accessing the local job market, setting up a business, accessing vocational training or further education, and assistance with legal migration opportunities.

“Should the parties’ domestic legislation regarding the provision of reintegration support to all or certain categories of returnees change, or should the overarching non-legally mandated package of reintegration support change, the parties will inform each other as soon as is practicable.”

” The MoU, similar to those signed in 2012, 2017, and 2022, is for an initial period of five years, renewable for a further five-year period, as may be agreed by the parties.

“We reiterate that media organisations should seek clarification when uncertain about any issue to avoid misinforming the public.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

News

SEE FULL LIST: NJC recommends 28 candidates for judicial appointments

Published

on

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 28 candidates for appointment as judicial officers across six states, including 24 candidates for various State High Courts.

The recommendations cover the High Courts of Kano, Ebonyi, Edo, Adamawa and Ogun states, the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal and Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The Council announced the recommendations in a statement issued on Wednesday by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe.

It said the decisions were taken at its 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun.

According to the Council, one candidate was recommended as Grand Kadi of the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, while another was recommended as Kadi of the Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal.

Two others were recommended as judges of the Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The appointment includes “24 High Court candidates and four candidates for the Sharia and Customary Courts of Appeal.”

The full list of the 28 recommended candidates is as follows:

PLATEAU STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (GRAND KADI)

1. Tijjani Jibrin Zololo

KANO STATE HIGH COURT

2. Nafisah Yusuf Hassan
3. Halima Yahuza Ahmad
4. Abdullahi Abdulsalam Bature
5. Musa Ibrahim Umar

EBONYI STATE HIGH COURT

6. Dickson Edmund Amaga

EDO STATE HIGH COURT

7. Benson Osagie Osawaru
8. Taiye Osayanmon Omoruyi
9. Dorothy Ibhade Adamaigbo
10. Festus Osagie Usiobaifo
11. Pius Idemudia Oiwoh
12. Majebi Samuel Amune
13. Emike Jessica Imuekemhe

See also  Tinubu to inaugurate $400m Rivers crude export terminal

ADAMAWA STATE HIGH COURT

14. Aminu Sa’ad
15. Ibrahim Ulenda Musa
16. Sadiq Giwa
17. Musa Bala Mijinyawa
18. Japhet Ibrahim
19. Aliyu Bakari
20. Yakubu Ahmadu

OGUN STATE HIGH COURT

21. Olakulehin Luqman Abiola Oke
22. Adebimpe Folusho Obienu
23. Fatimat Adeola Daudu
24. Rafiat Bolanle Kadiri
25. Oludotun Olaniyi Osho

ADAMAWA STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (KADI)

26. Abubakar Ishaku

ADAMAWA STATE CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL

27. Elshama Gwama Dimas
28. David Benjamin Pembi

The NJC said all the recommended candidates were expected to be sworn in by their respective state governors without delay.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

JD Vance reveals Iran war cost Republicans midterm elections, read details

Published

on

United States Vice President JD Vance has blamed the Iran war for the Republican Party’s poor performance in the 2026 midterm elections, saying many supporters of President Donald Trump switched allegiance to Democrats over dissatisfaction with the conflict.

Vance said this in a post on his X handle on Wednesday, arguing that the party’s defeat was not primarily caused by poor voter turnout but by the defection of voters who supported the Trump-Vance ticket in 2024.

He said data analysis conducted by his team before the elections had shown that Republican supporters were turning out in significant numbers, despite opinion polls predicting a major Democratic victory.

“One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was ‘composition’—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win,” he said.

Vance explained that although turnout was encouraging in several states, a member of his data team had warned him that many Republican voters were angry and might not vote for the party.

“Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was nine points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024,” he said.

“But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.”

The Vice President acknowledged that the party might have failed to communicate its economic policies effectively, particularly on the cost of living and inflation.

However, he said the major reasons voters abandoned the Republicans were concerns about the war, economic hardship, America’s foreign policy priorities and its relationship with Israel.

See also  Tinubu to inaugurate $400m Rivers crude export terminal

According to Vance, a pollster who accurately predicted the election outcome identified four major demands among former Republican supporters who switched to the Democrats.

The demands were to end the war, prioritise the cost of living and inflation, put America first and change the country’s relationship with Israel.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance stated.

He also defended television personality Rachel Campos-Duffy, saying her earlier call for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict had proved politically sound.

Vance warned against attempts by Republican establishment figures to attribute the party’s electoral setback to other issues, particularly immigration policy.

He said he was open to reviewing immigration enforcement strategies, including targeting businesses that employ undocumented workers, but rejected calls for amnesty.

“Anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you,” he said.

The Vice President challenged those who believed the war was worth the political cost to defend that position openly, noting that the defeat could cost Republicans control of the Senate for the next six years.

“If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay,” he said.

“Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.”

Despite the setback, Vance expressed optimism about the country’s future, urging disappointed Republican supporters to channel their anger into rebuilding the party and electing candidates who share their political views.

“Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country,” he added.

See also  Beyond politics: Fubara’s reignition of governance, Rivers’ development drive

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

UK to strengthen immigration enforcement with facial recognition

Published

on

The United Kingdom government plans to expand live facial recognition technology to strengthen immigration enforcement and identify individuals who have violated immigration rules.

The initiative, being developed by the Home Office, could see facial recognition cameras deployed at transport hubs and public events to help immigration officers identify people who have overstayed their visas, entered the country unlawfully or breached their immigration conditions.

According to policy documents published in October and sighted by PUNCH Online on Thursday, the proposed expansion could extend the technology’s use to general immigration enforcement, including civil immigration violations that do not necessarily involve criminal offences.

The development comes as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood seeks to intensify immigration enforcement through increased funding, additional personnel and expanded deportation operations.

The Home Office said the technology would help officers identify individuals subject to removal proceedings and those attempting to re-enter the UK unlawfully.

The policy documents also suggest that facial recognition could reduce the need for repeated enforcement visits to residential properties and workplaces.

Authorities have already conducted three trials of the technology at Holyhead port in north Wales between November 2025 and February 2026. The trials focused on identifying individuals travelling from Ireland who were subject to deportation orders or wanted over immigration-related criminal offences.

The programme has now entered its formal delivery phase, with officials considering wider deployments at transport hubs and large public gatherings.

A Home Office spokesperson confirmed that further trials were being considered while the government examined the potential benefits and implications of the technology.

See also  Tinubu, wife for historic UK state visit March

U K Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said: “Facial recognition technology has been the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching, already helping police take thousands of dangerous criminals off our streets.

“The benefits are clear, but we must ensure that its use is fair, safe and proportionate.

“It is right we put in place clear laws to ensure that the use of this technology is watertight, so the public can have confidence that these tools, which are vital to our safety, are used responsibly too.”

However, the proposed expansion has raised concerns among civil liberties organisations and migrant rights advocates over privacy, surveillance and the possibility of inaccurate identification.

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants described the development as a significant escalation of immigration enforcement powers, while the Open Rights Group questioned the transparency of the plans, public consent and the absence of comprehensive legislation governing facial recognition.

Critics have also warned that the technology could disproportionately affect people of colour because of concerns about identification accuracy.

Meanwhile, Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner William Webster has questioned whether existing regulatory arrangements are sufficient to oversee the expanding use of facial recognition across government agencies.

Under the proposed policy, individuals under 18 will not be included on facial recognition watchlists.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending