Connect with us

News

36 Speakers back state police, final test begins

Published

on

Support for the proposed state police gathered momentum on Thursday as speakers of the 36 State Houses of Assembly, governors, the Labour Party and the Forum of APC Speakers backed the constitutional amendment passed by the Senate, raising hopes that the bill could secure the approvals needed to become law.

The endorsements came barely 24 hours after the Senate passed the Constitution Alteration Bill seeking to establish state police across the federation, a major step in Nigeria’s decades-long effort to decentralise policing and tackle worsening insecurity.

The bill must now be approved by at least 24 state Houses of Assembly before it can be transmitted to President Bola Tinubu for assent.

While many stakeholders described the proposal as a necessary response to growing cases of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping and communal violence, the Peoples Redemption Party opposed the move, questioning the motives of the Tinubu administration and urging Nigerians to reject it.

Among the early supporters was Benue State Governor, Hyacinth Alia, who commended the National Assembly for passing the bill and described the development as a landmark step towards strengthening the country’s security architecture.

In a statement issued by his Chief Press Secretary, Kula Tersoo, the governor praised lawmakers for advancing what he described as a landmark reform capable of transforming the country’s security framework.

According to him, “the passage of the bill is a courageous and timely step,” adding that he has always been a strong advocate of state policing as a necessary measure to strengthen the nation’s security architecture and enhance the protection of lives and property.

The governor said, “The House of Representatives had passed the law a few weeks ago, and the concurrence by the Senate a few days ago has confirmed the genuine intentions of national assembly members to address the problem of insecurity in the country.”

Alia further argued that state police formations would possess a better understanding of local terrain, cultures and community dynamics, thereby enabling faster and more effective responses to security threats.

He also commended President Tinubu for what he described as visionary leadership in advancing reforms that had remained trapped in national debate for years.

In Kano State, deliberations on the bill began almost immediately as the State House of Assembly convened a stakeholders’ meeting with Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf to review the implications of the proposed amendment.

The Public Relations Officer of the Assembly, Kamaluddeen Shawai, confirmed the meeting on Thursday.

“We’re at the moment in a stakeholders meeting with the State Governor, Abba Yusuf,” Shawai said.

He added that the House would make its position known after consultations.

“The House will not comment on the bill for now until after the stakeholders meeting.”

The swift engagement in Kano reflected the urgency with which many states are approaching the proposed reform, given the security challenges confronting several regions of the country.

In Gombe State, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Abubakar Luggerewo, said lawmakers would subject the bill to detailed scrutiny but disclosed that their preliminary assessment was positive.

“As soon as we receive communication from the National Assembly about the ratification of that bill, the House will receive and refer it to the committee led by the Deputy Speaker.

“They will do the needful, which involves public hearing, stakeholders’ engagement and others. They will report their findings and, based on their findings, we will make our decision,” he said.

The Speaker explained that the Assembly would carefully evaluate the bill’s provisions and assess their implications for the state before taking a final position.

“From the committee stage, the House can be certain on the clauses of the bill. We will also look at our state’s peculiarities to be sure we are protected by the bill. If it suits our activities, we will go for it, but if we find in any way there are clauses we are not comfortable with, we will vote against it,” Luggerewo stated.

Despite the planned review process, he said lawmakers were generally favourably disposed to the proposal.

“In a nutshell, our general understanding of the bill is that it’s a welcome development. We are certain it will address the lingering security challenges that are happening in various locations.

“We are hoping the bill will create an avenue for the states to invest more in security. We will make decisions in the best interest of the state,” he said.

In Akwa Ibom, Speaker Udeme Otong said lawmakers would first study the bill before taking a definitive position.

“They just finished yesterday in the Senate; we have not gone through what the Senate sent to us. We cannot just decide on anything until we look at it.

“We have to look at the bill before you know the inputs that you have. For now, we don’t have the bill in our hands. How can you know what should be amended and what should not be amended? It was passed yesterday; how can it come to Akwa Ibom today?

“We don’t work like that. This is an executive bill; we don’t work anyhow. You need to see the bill, work on it and see the areas that need some input. You then call a public hearing. The bill is for the public to make their inputs.”

Bayelsa lawmakers also indicated support for the proposal.

Chairman of the House Committee on Information, Brown Ebizi, said the Assembly was prepared to expedite consideration of the bill once transmitted.

He said, “We are in full support of the bill, and we believe that when it arrives in the state, we will work on it expeditiously. We are convinced that it is for the benefit of the state and the people.”

Support also came from the Forum of Progressive Speakers of State Legislatures under the APC.

In a statement signed by its Chairman and Speaker of the Jigawa State House of Assembly, Haruna Dangyatin, the forum described the Senate’s action as a historic breakthrough.

See also  Reps to probe ₦20tn abandoned FG lands, buildings

“The passage of this bill is a resounding victory for effective governance and community-focused policing,” Dangyatin stated.

He added that the legislation would empower states to protect their citizens more effectively.

“For years, the clamour for a security structure that understands the local terrain has been loud.

“With this enactment, we are empowering states to better protect their people and respond swiftly to security threats.”

Dangyatin assured Nigerians that APC-controlled legislatures would facilitate ratification and establish strong oversight mechanisms.

“We will ensure state policing operates within the bounds of human rights, professionalism, and the rule of law.”

He further pledged collaboration with state executives to ensure adequate funding for training, equipment and personnel welfare.

Similarly, the Labour Party endorsed the proposed reform and urged governors and state lawmakers across the federation to support it.

In a statement issued by its National Publicity Secretary, Ken Asogwa, the party described the Senate’s action as a major milestone in efforts to strengthen internal security.

“The Labour Party commends the National Assembly, particularly the Senate, for its courage, swiftness and sense of patriotism in passing the State Police Bill recently transmitted to it by President Bola Tinubu,” Asogwa said.

He noted that Nigerians had long demanded a policing system that is closer to communities and more responsive to local security threats.

“For years, Nigerians across all regions have clamoured for a more effective and responsive policing architecture capable of addressing the growing and increasingly complex security challenges confronting the nation.

“The passage of this bill, therefore, represents a significant step towards strengthening internal security and bringing law enforcement closer to the people.”

The LP acknowledged fears that governors could abuse state police formations but argued that constitutional safeguards incorporated into the bill would minimise such risks.

“While the party acknowledges the concerns expressed in certain quarters regarding the possibility of abuse of the state police system, especially in view of our experience with State Independent Electoral Commissions and allegations of undue interference by some state governors, the realities of contemporary Nigeria make a compelling case for a decentralised policing structure,” he stated.

According to him, “The Labour Party is particularly encouraged by the constitutional safeguards embedded in the amendment bill, especially the provisions contained in section 17, which establish clear mechanisms to prevent abuse and ensure accountability in the operation of state police.

“These safeguards, if faithfully implemented, should serve as effective checks against arbitrary control or misuse of the system by any state executive.”

He further argued that no policing arrangement was flawless.

Asogwa said, “The party further notes that no policing model is perfect. However, given the evident limitations of the current centralised policing arrangement in adequately securing a vast and diverse country such as Nigeria, there is an urgent need to embrace innovative approaches and fresh ideas capable of improving security outcomes for citizens.”

The party subsequently called on governors and lawmakers nationwide to support the amendment.

“As the bill now awaits the concurrence of the State Houses of Assembly before being transmitted to the President for assent, the Labour Party calls on governors and state lawmakers across the 36 states of the federation to rise above partisan considerations and lend their support to this important constitutional reform in the overriding interest of national security and public safety.

“We believe that with proper oversight, transparency and adherence to constitutional provisions, state policing can become a vital instrument for combating crime, enhancing community security and strengthening the federation,” he stated.

The Conference of Speakers of State Legislatures in Nigeria also signalled support for the proposal.

Its Chairman and Speaker of the Delta State House of Assembly, Emomotimi Guwor, said state legislatures remained committed to giving the bill diligent consideration.

“As Speakers of the 36 State Houses of Assembly, we had earlier indicated our support for the proposed legislation because we believe that community-based policing, properly structured under law, will enhance safety and response time across our states. Security is local, and our people deserve policing architecture that understands their terrain and challenges.”

He added, “With the Bill now proceeding to the next legislative stage, the Conference assures Nigerians that State Assemblies will give it diligent consideration in line with Section 9(2) of the 1999 Constitution.”

Also lending his voice, former lawmaker representing Ekiti North, Senator Ayodele Arise, described the bill as a critical step towards addressing insecurity.

“It is a very welcome development. Having state police is a much-needed measure to reduce the security threats we face in the country.

“There is no way security challenges will be eliminated. But kudos to Mr President for being very proactive on this issue as we continue to battle the challenges of insecurity in the country,” he noted.

The former lawmaker argued that local policing would improve intelligence gathering and enable quicker responses to threats.

Addressing concerns about possible abuse by governors, Arise said constitutional checks and balances should be strengthened.

He said, “Many of the objections are legitimate concerns, but most of the federal states we know around the world, like the United States and Canada, have this multi-layered policing system that has worked for them over the years.

“So, the challenges are there, especially now that we are just trying to experiment with it.

“It is our responsibility to ensure that we put a few checks and balances here and there to curtail the excesses of any governor who intends to use the Police against the people of his state.”

The Plateau State House of Assembly also pledged support for the reform.

Speaker Naanlong Daniel said the legislature was prepared to prioritise the bill when transmitted.

“The Assembly believes state policing will contribute significantly to ending the prolonged insecurity affecting parts of Plateau State and other regions of the country.”

He added that lawmakers had consistently advocated its establishment and assured stakeholders of the Assembly’s readiness to provide the required legislative backing.

In Ondo State, Speaker Olamide Oladiji similarly backed the proposal, describing it as a necessary response to Nigeria’s security challenges.

See also  Oil output slumps as Nigeria, Libya, Venezuela drag OPEC+ targets

“Insecurity issue in the country now, I think it’s very, very important that the government come up with this state police creation, and from the look of things, virtually all the states are keyed into it.”

Oladiji dismissed fears that governors would weaponise state police against political opponents.

“I want to disagree on that aspect. Look at our Amotekun here; it has been created for some time now. Did you hear any negative comments? There is no negative comment, even from the opposition, that the government of the day uses it against any of their political opponents, journalists or activists,” he said.

He cautioned politicians against undermining the reform.

“We should not politicise the issue of the state police. We should not allow even the so-called politician to politicise it in such a way that it will not allow it to come to fruition,” he said.

However, the PRP strongly criticised the initiative and urged Nigerians to reject it.

In a statement by its National Chairman, Dr Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, the party questioned the credibility of the current administration to oversee such a major restructuring of policing.

The statement read, “The Peoples Redemption Party is deeply concerned over plans by President Tinubu’s administration to procure state police through constitutional amendment at a time when its credibility and competence are at an unprecedented low level in our democratic history.”

The PRP argued that while constitutional procedures might ultimately facilitate the amendment, the administration lacked the public trust required for such a far-reaching reform.

“This administration lacks the moral assets and the trust of Nigerians to undertake a major shift in the policing structure of the country. The APC administration has failed to manage our security structure and institutions. “ It’s a plan to engineer the emergence of state police that is suspicious, and it should be rejected,” it stated.

The party advised that the issue should be deferred until after the next general election.

“The PRP advises that the forthcoming election should be a threshold which should be crossed with credibility and popular acclaim before the nation decides on important issues such as state police structures,” he said.

Despite the opposition, momentum appears to be building behind the amendment as state assemblies prepare to begin formal consideration of the proposal.

The Senate had on Wednesday approved the constitutional amendment after a clause-by-clause review of the report presented by the Senate Committee on the Review of the Constitution, chaired by Deputy Senate President Barau Jibrin.

The legislation seeks to create a dual policing structure under which state governments can establish police services within their jurisdictions while the Nigeria Police Force retains responsibility for national security issues such as terrorism, border protection, cybercrime, arms trafficking and other federal offences.

Lawmakers inserted several safeguards aimed at preventing abuse, including provisions prohibiting state police authorities from targeting individuals or groups solely for criticising governments and allowing federal intervention in cases involving breakdown of public order, human rights violations or threats to national security.

The Safeguards

Meanwhile, an analysis of the bill by our correspondent on Thursday showed that the proposed constitutional amendment seeking to establish state police services across Nigeria could create far-reaching restructuring of the country’s policing architecture.

This includes the expansion of the National Police Council to accommodate representatives of the Nigerian Bar Association, the Nigeria Labour Congress, the National Human Rights Commission and all state attorneys-general.

The proposal, contained in A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 to Provide for the Establishment of State Police Services and for Related Matters, seeks to create a broader oversight mechanism for policing while balancing state control with federal safeguards.

In the bill, the National Police Council would become one of the most diverse security oversight bodies in the country, bringing together legal practitioners, labour leaders, human rights advocates, retired senior police officers and state representatives.

The council would be chaired by a chairman appointed by the President and confirmed by the National Assembly.

Other members would include the Attorney-General of the Federation, a serving police officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector-General representing the Federal Police Service, attorneys-general of all states, six retired police officers representing the six geopolitical zones, a representative of the National Human Rights Commission, a representative of the Public Complaints Commission, a representative of the Nigeria Labour Congress, a representative of the Nigerian Bar Association and a secretary appointed by the President.

According to the bill, the council would be responsible for coordinating national policing policies, strengthening cooperation between federal and state police services, recommending appointments and removals of police chiefs and supervising the activities of policing institutions across the federation.

Part of the bill read, “The National Police Council shall comprise the following members: a Chairman to be appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the National Assembly; Attorney-General of the Federation; a serving police officer not below the rank of a Deputy Inspector General of Police to represent the Federal Police Service; the Attorney-General of each State of the Federation.

“Others are six retired police officers not below the rank of Commissioner of Police representing each of the geo-political zones of the country to be appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the National Assembly; one representative of the National Human Rights Commission; one representative of the Public Complaints Commission; a representative of the Nigeria Labour Congress to be nominated by the President of the Nigerian Labour Congress; a representative of the Nigerian Bar Association to be nominated by the President of the Nigerian Bar Association; and the Secretary to the Council to be appointed by the President.”

The functions of the National Police Council shall include the organisation and administration of the Federal Police Service and all other matters relating thereto, recommending to the President on the appointment and removal of the Inspector-General of Police, recommending to the Governor of a State on the appointment and removal of the Commissioner of Police, coordinating national policing policy and inter-governmental cooperation between the Federal Police Service and State Police Services, and supervising the activities of the Federal Police Service and State Police Services.”

See also  Tinubu orders repatriation of 300 Nigerians held in Ethiopian prison

The proposed composition appears designed to address long-standing concerns about political interference and inadequate civilian participation in police oversight.

By bringing state attorneys-general, labour representatives, lawyers and human rights advocates into the council, the amendment seeks to establish a broader accountability framework capable of monitoring both federal and state police operations.

The bill also introduces constitutional safeguards aimed at protecting state commissioners of police from arbitrary suspension or dismissal by governors.

Under the proposal, a state commissioner of police can only be suspended or removed for stated reasons, after a fair hearing, on the recommendation of the National Police Council and with the approval of not less than two-thirds of members of the state’s House of Assembly.

The bill provides, “A Commissioner of Police of a State shall not be suspended or removed except for stated cause, in accordance with a fair hearing, on the recommendation of the National Police Council and subject to approval by a resolution supported by not less than two-thirds majority of members of the House of Assembly of the State.”

The provision is expected to address concerns raised by critics of state policing who fear governors could transform state police services into political tools.

The amendment equally bars governors from issuing operational directives targeting specific individuals, political parties, associations or groups.

According to the bill, no governor shall direct a commissioner of police to arrest, detain, investigate or refrain from investigating any named individual except in accordance with the law.

It further prohibits directives that could result in unlawful actions, violations of fundamental rights, suppression of lawful political activity or discrimination on ethnic, religious or political grounds.

While the bill grants states the authority to establish and operate their own police services, it also preserves federal powers to intervene under exceptional circumstances.

According to the proposed amendment, the Federal Police Service may temporarily assume operational responsibility over a state police service where public order has broken down, where a state police service becomes incapable of functioning, where there is evidence of systematic human rights abuses, or where national security is threatened.

Specifically, federal intervention may occur where there is an actual or imminent breakdown of public order that a state police service is unable or unwilling to contain; where a governor formally requests intervention; where serious administrative or financial incapacity threatens public safety; where there is substantial evidence of partisan intimidation, ethnic or religious persecution; or where threats transcend state boundaries and endanger national security.

The proposal, however, imposes strict conditions on such interventions.

It states that any intervention must be authorised in writing by the President and must clearly state the grounds, territorial scope, functions and duration of the intervention.

The bill further requires that the governor, the State House of Assembly, the National Police Council and the National Assembly be notified within 48 hours of the commencement of any intervention.

It reads, “An intervention under this section shall be authorised in writing by the President and shall state the grounds, territory, functions and duration of the intervention; and notice of the intervention shall be given to the Governor of the State, the Speaker of the House of Assembly of the State, the National Police Council and the National Assembly within forty-eight hours of the start of any intervention.”

The proposal also provides that any intervention extending beyond the period prescribed by law must receive Senate approval and remain subject to judicial review.

It further states that no intervention shall dissolve a state police service or suspend elected institutions of a state except as provided by the Constitution.

Another notable provision in the bill is the attempt to insulate police service commissions from political influence.

The amendment proposes that both the Federal Police Service Commission and State Police Service Commissions should be empowered to make rules regulating their procedures without requiring presidential or gubernatorial approval.

According to the proposal, state police service commissions shall function independently and may confer powers and responsibilities on officers necessary for carrying out their constitutional duties without interference from governors.

The bill noted that the provision is aimed at strengthening institutional autonomy and ensuring professionalism in recruitment, promotion and disciplinary processes.

The bill formally replaces the existing constitutional framework, establishing a single Nigeria Police Force with a dual policing system comprising the Federal Police Service and State Police Services.

Under the arrangement, the Federal Police Service would retain responsibility for federal crimes, terrorism, cybercrime, organised crime, arms trafficking, border security, protection of federal institutions and policing within the Federal Capital Territory.

State police services, on the other hand, would be responsible for enforcing state laws, maintaining public safety and order, protecting lives and property and carrying out other local policing functions prescribed by state laws.

However, no state police service would commence operations until it has been established by a law passed by the state’s House of Assembly and certified as meeting national minimum standards prescribed by the National Assembly.

The debate over state policing has intensified in recent years amid rising insecurity, including banditry, kidnapping, communal conflicts and terrorism across various parts of the country.

Supporters argue that state police would improve intelligence gathering, enhance community policing and enable quicker responses to local security threats.

Opponents, however, have expressed fears that governors may abuse state police structures to intimidate political opponents and suppress dissent.

The constitutional amendment seeks to strike a balance between these competing concerns by granting states policing powers while establishing layers of federal oversight, legislative checks, judicial review and civilian participation through an expanded National Police Council.

punch.ng

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

Germany deports 137 Nigerians in five chartered flights

Published

on

Germany deported at least 137 Nigerian citizens in five documented chartered operations between February and June 2026, according to reports sighted by The PUNCH.

The documented arrivals comprised 27 Nigerians deported in February, 37 deported directly by Germany as part of a 50-person joint European Union operation in March, and 24, 23 and 26 Nigerians deported in April, May and June, respectively, according to figures contained in reports monitored by the DERS Team and Refugees4refugees.org.

The figures indicate an increase in the use of chartered flights to return Nigerians from Germany and other European countries, with several of the operations involving cooperation among European states.

On February 18, 2026, a batch of 27 Nigerians arrived at the Lagos Cargo Airport following a deportation operation from Germany.

According to Refugees4refugees.org, the flight was operated by World2fly and departed Stuttgart before arriving in Lagos shortly before 2 pm.

The report said the operation was primarily enforced by Germany, although one person, described as severely ill and mentally unfit, was transferred from Slovakia to join the 26 people deported from Germany.

It also identified Baden-Württemberg as a major participant in the operation and said Stuttgart had hosted both the December 2025 and February 2026 deportation operations to Nigeria.

The report further alleged that while some of those deported had serious health conditions, others had lived and worked in Germany for several years.

It cited the case of a single mother and her three children who were deported from the Sindelfingen district in Stuttgart despite reportedly having documentation relating to their residence status.

See also  Reps to probe ₦20tn abandoned FG lands, buildings

According to the report, the family subsequently returned to Germany after intervention by a volunteer and confirmation from local foreign authorities that the deportation had been made in error.

Furthermore, the February deportation also coincided with Nigeria’s participation in preparations for the Voluntary National Review of the Global Compact for Migration ahead of the 2026 International Migration Review Forum in New York.

The DERS Team said that Nigerian government agencies did not send representatives to receive the deportees at the airport, adding that the returning Nigerians were subsequently transported away from the airport without adequate assistance.

On March 10, another 50 people were deported to Nigeria in a joint EU operation hosted by Germany in cooperation with Spain, Austria and Belgium.

Germany accounted directly for 37 of the deportations, according to the figures provided.

The operation was described as the largest single deportation involving Nigerians in the three years referenced in the report.

A further 24 Nigerians, including women and a minor, were deported on April 9 on a chartered flight from Frankfurt organised through Frontex and German authorities, according to the supplied data.

In May 2026, another batch of 23 deportees was returned to Nigeria, while 26 Nigerians arrived in Lagos on June 17 following another routine chartered deportation flight.

Taken together, the five documented batches amounted to 137 Nigerians returned to the country between February and June 2026.

The figures highlight the continued use of organised charter flights in the enforcement of migration decisions involving Nigerians in Europe.

Migration rights advocates have, however, continued to argue that deportation policies should be accompanied by adequate safeguards for vulnerable people and proper procedures to prevent wrongful removal.

See also  Presidency Gives Update On Edun’s Health Status

While migration is as old as time itself, identified underlying factors driving irregular migration include conflict, exploitation, climate-related pressures and economic inequality.

Migration is the permanent or temporary movement of people from one place to another, changing their home. It can happen within a country or across borders, shaping populations, cultures, and job markets.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Adeyemi demands media, lawyers’ presence before Reps probe on PFIPC scandal

Published

on

The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversy surrounding the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council is yet to decide where it will question the council’s self-appointed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, a source familiar with the committee’s proceedings has disclosed.

The development comes as Adeyemi insisted that his lawyers and journalists must be present before he submits to questioning by the House committee.

The committee, chaired by the lawmaker representing Kanke/Kanam/Pankshin Federal Constituency of Plateau State, Yusuf Gagdi, is probing how the PFIPC secured official office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of more than N1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite allegedly having no legal existence.

The investigation has attracted significant public attention following allegations that the council operated within government structures despite lacking legal recognition, raising concerns about possible lapses in public financial management and institutional oversight.

Adeyemi, who has been in police custody over the controversy surrounding the council, is expected to appear before the committee this week, following testimonies from several senior government officials.

However, as of Sunday, the venue for the much-anticipated session remained unsettled.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to discuss the committee’s proceedings with the media, confirmed the development in response to an inquiry by The PUNCH.

Asked whether the committee had chosen a venue for Adeyemi’s appearance, the source simply replied, “No decision yet.”

The development followed the committee’s hearings with key government officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu; the Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Hamisu Abdullahi; and representatives of the Inspector-General of Police.

The officials’ testimonies reportedly raised questions about how Adeyemi allegedly presented himself as the head of the PFIPC and secured recognition and access within government circles.

Adeyemi had, through his lawyers, indicated his willingness to appear before the committee publicly and respond to questions concerning the allegations.

However, Gagdi said the committee would determine the venue for the session at a later date.

Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has rejected the findings of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission on the PFIPC controversy, describing the investigation as inadequate and calling for a broader and transparent inquiry.

In an interview with our correspondent, CUPP spokesperson, Agu Bryan, said the ICPC’s report, which reportedly cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing while indicting Adeniyi Adeyemi, failed to answer critical questions about how an allegedly non-existent government agency was able to operate at such a high level.

“The ICPC probe of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council which exonerated the Presidency and indicted Adeniyi Adeyemi is nothing short of a charade,” Bryan said.

He argued that the report appeared to portray Adeyemi as having operated almost entirely alone, despite the scale of activities attributed to him.

See also  Tinubu orders repatriation of 300 Nigerians held in Ethiopian prison

According to Bryan, such an operation could not have continued without assistance or enabling actions by officials within government institutions.

“As Nigerians, we know that someone could not have operated an alleged high-profile agency of such magnitude without enablers, either within the Presidency or across the government agencies involved,” he said.

Bryan called for a broader examination of the roles allegedly played by government institutions referenced in Adeyemi’s correspondence, including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.

He particularly cited the testimony of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack, that her office failed to conduct due diligence on some of the documents associated with the controversial council.

The coalition also questioned how the PFIPC allegedly found its way into the national budget if, as reported by the ICPC, it had no legal foundation.

CUPP said the National Assembly and relevant government ministries owed Nigerians an explanation over how funds were appropriated to an organisation whose legal status had allegedly not been established.

“The National Assembly, particularly the House of Representatives, which appropriated funds to an agency that, according to the investigation, never existed as a creation of law, also owes Nigerians an explanation,” Bryan said.

He asked who within the Ministry of Budget and National Planning processed the budget line attributed to the PFIPC and what verification mechanisms were applied before public funds were appropriated.

CUPP also raised questions about the alleged recruitment of hundreds of staff and the extent to which Adeyemi was granted access to official government activities.

Bryan said the issues went beyond determining whether Adeyemi forged documents, arguing that investigators should establish how he allegedly gained access to government processes and institutions.

The controversy escalated after investigators reportedly established that a signature attributed to the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, was forged.

CUPP said the finding should prompt investigators to examine other official documents and correspondence allegedly used by Adeyemi.

“It is commendable that the House and the Police have established that the signature of the Chief of Staff to the President was allegedly forged. But that raises another critical question: how many other documents, official correspondences and signatures allegedly used by Adeyemi were also forged?” Bryan asked.

He said Nigerians deserved to know the full extent of the alleged deception and whether officials responsible for verifying the credentials of individuals dealing with public institutions failed in their duties.

The coalition further questioned how the PFIPC allegedly acquired sufficient official recognition to participate in government processes and appear in the national budget.

“How did a supposedly non-existent agency attain such a level of official recognition and attention that it found its way into the national budget?” he asked.

CUPP also called for Adeyemi to be given a fair opportunity to defend himself before the House committee, arguing that a transparent confrontation with the evidence could help determine whether other individuals or institutions were involved.

See also  Kwara massacre: UN condemns killings as Türkiye pledges support

“Was Adeyemi given fair hearing thus far? Has he been given the privilege to appear before the Yusuf Gagdi-led Ad hoc Committee of the House of Representatives probing the matter to be interrogated and directly answer questions?” Bryan said.

He invoked the legal principle nemo judex in causa sua—that no person should be a judge in his own cause—in arguing that the investigation should be conducted independently and transparently.

Bryan said anything short of an open and impartial investigation would fail to satisfy public expectations.

He also criticised the ICPC’s handling of the matter and called for independent professional bodies to be considered if the Federal Government was genuinely interested in establishing the facts.

“If President Tinubu is determined to unravel the truth, independent organisations or bodies like the NBA, West African Bar Association or international or private investigators should be allowed to come in and take over the investigation,” Bryan said.

He accused federal security and anti-corruption agencies of lacking sufficient independence to investigate the controversy objectively, a claim the agencies have not accepted.

The House committee’s inquiry follows mounting concerns over how Adeyemi allegedly operated the PFIPC, secured government recognition and participated in official engagements despite questions over the organisation’s legal status.

The controversy has also drawn attention to the roles of several government institutions whose officials allegedly interacted with Adeyemi or processed documents connected to the council.

The committee is expected to hear directly from Adeyemi as it seeks to establish how the PFIPC was created, how it operated, who recognised it and whether public funds were allocated or expended in connection with its activities.

 

 

His appearance before the committee could therefore prove significant in determining whether the alleged scheme was the work of an individual or involved officials and institutions within government.

Adeyemi demands media

Adeyemi, through his lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, had on Wednesday rejected the House committee’s decision to question him at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The committee subsequently attempted to question him on Thursday, but Adeyemi declined to respond to its questions, prompting the lawmakers to reschedule the interrogation for Monday.

However, a family source said Adeyemi had informed the committee that he would only submit to questioning if journalists and his legal representatives were allowed to be present.

“They eventually rescheduled to Monday and my brother told them that when they are coming, they should come with the media, otherwise he will not grant them audience.

“Initially, they agreed to come with the media, but later they said they would not be coming with any media. They said if he refuses to grant them audience, they will go ahead and conclude their investigation and it will be said that he was the one who failed to grant them audience,” the source said.

The development came a day after Adeyemi’s family raised concerns over an attempt by members of the House committee to question him in police custody without his lawyers present.

Adeyemi’s brother, Peter, alleged that the detained promoter declined to answer questions because his legal representatives were absent.

“The Reps committee came and wanted to interrogate him, but he refused. They are still there trying to make him talk without any of his lawyers being present. We are crying out loud so that the right thing would be done.

“He has stated that he wants to be quizzed the same way others who have accused him have spoken. It’s not that he is not willing to state his side of the story,” he said.

When contacted on whether the police were aware of the committee’s proposed visit and whether the lawmakers would be granted access to Adeyemi, the police spokesperson, Ani Ineidu, said visitors would be allowed provided they met the necessary requirements.

“Yes, if they have necessary documents. I’m not aware if they have relevant documents or authorisation, but if they fulfil the conditions, everybody who is under police custody has a right to visitors.

“So, in a case like this, if they have that right, they will be granted access,” Ineidu said.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, Oyedokun said his client welcomed the House investigation into the alleged establishment and operations of the PFIPC but opposed what he described as a closed-door interrogation.

“We have read that the committee intends to interview our client at an undisclosed date and place. We ask it, respectfully, to think again.

“Everyone else in this matter has been heard in public, and what has been said about our client was said in public. He should be allowed to answer in the same place it was said,” the lawyer stated.

The committee had on Tuesday announced that it would question Adeyemi at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The Chairman of the committee, Yusuf Gagdi, said the arrangement was necessary to avoid interfering with ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.

Gagdi said the committee had invited Adeyemi but was informed by the police that he remained in custody pursuant to a court order.

He added that the National Assembly would not act in a manner that undermined the judiciary or violated the principle of separation of powers, stressing that lawmakers lacked the authority to override an existing court order directing Adeyemi’s detention.

 

 

The committee is investigating allegations surrounding the creation and operations of the PFIPC, including claims of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and the unlawful use of government facilities and official insignia.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

PHOTOS: Osun-Osogbo: Priestess defends 10-year-old Arugba, dismisses child abuse claims

Published

on

The Araba of Osogbo, Ifáyemí Elébuibón, has defended the tradition of selecting a young maiden as the Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, describing the role as a privilege rather than child abuse.

This is as a priestess and custodian of Osun Osogbo also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.


Osun-Osogbo: Priestess

Elébuibón spoke in a video interview posted on Sunday by Yoruba cultural content creator, Wàá Ṣeré, amid discussions surrounding the age and responsibilities of the 10-year-old Arugba, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi.

Arugba is the young maiden chosen to carry the sacred calabash during the annual Osun-Osogbo Festival procession to the Osun Sacred Grove.

Alimot, a member of the royal family of the Ataoja of Osogbo, was selected through traditional Ifa divination in March 2025.

She carried the sacred calabash for the first time during this year’s procession to the Osun Sacred Grove on Friday, after she was unable to do so during the 2025 festival because of her young age.


10-year-old Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi carries the sacred calabash at Osun Osogbo festival…Photo Credit: Dewunmi Lagos

Explaining the role and its benefit, Elébuibón said the Arugba served as a spiritual intermediary between the Osun deity and the people.

He added that the responsibility was not determined by biological age.

“You see those people saying all that? They lack understanding. They don’t know. Whoever says the Arugba is too young—this one is ten years old, but some started at five!

See also  VIDEO - Dangote Trucks Move Freely in China But Face Roadblocks in Nigeria | Must Watch!

“The role the Arugba plays is a role of spiritual maturity, not about physical age. What the Arugba does for the town and the community is what the white man calls a ‘medium’—an intermediary between the Orisa and the people,” he said.

Elébuibón said the young maiden could communicate the wishes of the deity to the people because of the spiritual significance attached to the position.

“As young as she is, provided she remains pure and undefiled by any man, she can wake up one morning and say, ‘Mother Osun said this and that, do this, do that, don’t do this.’”

He added that the Arugba’s spiritual development was not necessarily tied to her physical age.

“Very soon, she will mature spiritually far beyond her biological age because the Orisa themselves nourish and care for them. Her role is not about age; what she does is not about age.”


FILE: Ifayemi Elebuibon

A female priestess and culture custodian, in another video posted by culture content creator Olamide Oseyifunmii, also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.

According to her, the chosen maiden must be a virgin and is expected to observe certain taboos associated with the role.

“Whomever Ifa chooses becomes the Arugba. The Arugba must be a girl who remains untouched, pure, and a virgin. That is strictly what the Arugba must be,” she said.

She rejected the description of the practice as child abuse, saying the young girls selected for the role were traditionally protected and treated with care.

See also  Wike - I’ll testify in Kanu’s trial on one condition; see the condition

“Being selected as the Arugba carries taboos and honours; it is not what Westerners label as ‘child abuse’.”

The priestess said the Arugba was not expected to carry heavy loads apart from the sacred calabash during the annual procession.

She also explained the spiritual significance attached to the young maiden, saying devotees who bow before the Arugba were not worshipping the child but honouring the Osun deity believed to be represented through her.

“They were bowing to the divine spirit of Osun Ewuji inside her and upon her head,” she said.

The 2026 Osun-Osogbo Festival, which began on August 7, is being held at the Osun Sacred Grove in Osogbo, Osun State, and will run until August 19.

The annual festival, centred on the Osun deity, is one of Nigeria’s major traditional and cultural festivals and attracts worshippers, tourists and cultural enthusiasts from Nigeria and beyond.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending