Frame-Tite Framing Screws for steel and timber framing

Frame-Tite Framing Screws ensure stable assembly in metal and wood framing applications. BDN Fasteners India supplies these screws with strong threading and protective coatings for durability and long service life. The screws support heavy loads, minimize loosening, and are suitable for framework installations in industrial, commercial, and modular construction. Their precision design ensures reliable fixing and professional installation.

https://bdnfastenersindia.com/frame-tite.php

Jigawa Court Orders Arrest of DSS Officer Over Alleged Crimes Against Minor, Directs Police Investigation

A Magistrate Court in Hadejia, Jigawa State, has ordered the arrest of a Department of State Services (DSS) officer, Ifeanyi Festus, and directed the Nigeria Police Force to investigate alleged offences against a minor, following a petition filed by Abdulhadi Ibrahim. The court’s order, issued in Suit No: DCC/01/2026 and signed by His Worship Sadisu Musa Esq., signals the seriousness of the allegations and underscores the judiciary’s commitment to protecting vulnerable citizens.

The application for the arrest and investigation was moved by Mr. Kabiru Adamu Esq., alongside Babangida Garba Esq., acting as counsel to the applicant. They urged the court to invoke its powers under Section 125 and Section 102(5) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) to compel immediate action against the DSS officer.

In granting the application, the court directed the Commissioner of Police, Jigawa State Police Command, or the Deputy Director-General of the DSS to arrest the respondent. It also specifically mandated the Nigeria Police Force, Jigawa State Command, to conduct a discreet investigation into the alleged offences.

The court further issued an urgent directive to the DSS to immediately release the victim, identified as Walida Abdulhadi, and reunite her with her parents, emphasizing the protection of the minor as a matter of priority. The ruling highlights the legal mechanisms available to hold security personnel accountable when allegations of misconduct arise, even against agencies with high-level authority like the DSS.

Observers say the case raises critical questions about accountability, child protection, and oversight of security agencies in Nigeria. It also demonstrates the judiciary’s willingness to intervene in sensitive matters involving minors and ensure adherence to the law, regardless of the accused’s position or rank.

As of the time of reporting, there has been no official statement from the DSS or the Jigawa State Police Command regarding the implementation of the arrest or investigation orders. Legal analysts suggest that swift compliance with the court’s directives will be a litmus test for both the DSS and police in upholding justice in cases involving vulnerable citizens.

The case continues to attract public attention, underlining the growing demand for transparency, rule of law, and protection of minors in Nigeria’s criminal justice system.

Is Abuja Safe Anymore? NBA Raises Alarm Over Return of ‘One-Chance’ Killings After Murder of Nurse and Lawyer

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has raised a grave alarm over what it described as the disturbing return of “one-chance” criminal operations in Abuja following the brutal killing of two professionals in separate incidents across the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). In a statement signed by its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, the association warned that insecurity is once again tightening its grip on Nigeria’s seat of power.

According to the NBA, the victims were Ms. Chinemerem Pascalina Chuwumeziem, a nurse, and Princess Chigbo Mediatrix, a lawyer and former Treasurer of the NBA Abuja Branch. Both women were allegedly murdered after falling prey to criminals posing as commercial transport operators—an infamous tactic known locally as “one-chance.” Their bodies were later discovered in different parts of the city, sparking widespread fear among residents.

The association described the killings as a chilling reminder of the growing vulnerability of Abuja residents, stressing that the victims were not faceless individuals but professionals who simply intended to return home safely from their daily engagements. The NBA said the incidents had plunged the capital into grief and exposed a dangerous deterioration in public safety.

Condemning the attacks in the strongest terms, the NBA warned that the pattern of “one-chance” crimes could no longer be ignored. It stated that criminal gangs masquerading as transport operators have turned routine commuting into a life-threatening gamble, making ordinary citizens, workers, and professionals targets on the city’s roads.

Osigwe described the killing of Princess Chigbo Mediatrix as particularly painful for the legal community, noting that she was a committed member of the Bar whom he knew personally. He said her death was not only a professional loss but a deeply personal blow, underscoring that lawyers—like all Nigerians—remain dangerously exposed in an environment where criminals operate with impunity.

The NBA warned that the murders represent more than individual tragedies, arguing that they signal a broader erosion of security in the FCT. It stressed that when citizens cannot commute safely, when professionals are attacked in plain sight, and when criminal networks act unchecked in the nation’s capital, the foundations of social order are severely threatened.

Calling for urgent action, the association urged the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, the Nigeria Police Force, and other security agencies to treat the situation as a full-scale security emergency. It demanded immediate, visible, and coordinated measures to dismantle “one-chance” syndicates, including intensified intelligence gathering, surveillance, policing of transport corridors, and targeted operations against known criminal networks.

The NBA also insisted on thorough, transparent, and time-bound investigations into the killings, warning that failure to deliver justice would deepen public fear and embolden criminal elements. It emphasized that justice must not only be promised but must be seen to be done, with perpetrators, collaborators, and enablers identified, arrested, and prosecuted.

Reaffirming the state’s duty to protect lives, the association said citizens should not have to choose between earning a living and staying alive. It warned that Abuja must not become a hunting ground where criminals prey on the vulnerable while law enforcement appears distant or reactive.

The NBA extended condolences to the families of the victims, the healthcare community, the NBA Abuja Branch, and residents of the FCT. The killings have reignited public debate over safety in Nigeria’s capital, raising urgent questions about urban security, policing, public transport safety, and government accountability in protecting citizens from organized street crime.

Is Ebonyi Government Threatening Community Land and Mineral Rights? Host Communities Petition Gov. Nwifuru Over Nigercem Dispute

Host communities of the Nigerian Cement Company (Nigercem Plc) in Ebonyi State have petitioned Governor Francis Nwifuru over what they describe as growing threats to their land, mineral resources and legally established rights. The communities, through a petition dated January 7, 2026 and signed by Dr. Sulaiman Usman, SAN, accused unnamed political actors of attempting to undermine existing court judgments and community consents under the pretext of building a new state-owned cement plant.

In the petition addressed to the governor at the Ebonyi State Governor’s Lodge in Abuja, the communities warned that recent developments could “gravely prejudice” their proprietary rights and destabilize the lawful future of Nigercem Plc. They recalled that Ibeto Group lawfully acquired majority shares in Nigercem in 2010, but that the Ebonyi State Government under former Governor Martin Elechi allegedly revoked the company’s mining lease, a move they resisted through litigation.

According to the petition, prolonged court battles ended in 2013 with judgments in favour of Ibeto Group and the host communities. The communities said they supported the investor because earlier plans to site a new cement plant outside their area would have reduced them to mere limestone suppliers without benefiting from the economic and social gains of hosting a functioning cement factory.

While welcoming Governor Nwifuru’s campaign pledge to work with Ibeto Group to revive Nigercem, the communities expressed disappointment that a 15-member committee set up in August 2025 has yet to publicly present its findings. Their concerns deepened after the governor announced plans during the 2026 budget presentation to borrow ₦150 billion to build a new state-owned cement plant, despite the existence of Nigercem Plc.

The petition further alleged that some political office holders from the host clan were pressured on December 31, 2025, to sign a fresh consent letter purportedly revoking earlier agreements with Ibeto Group. The communities described this development as “deeply unsettling,” adding that the proposed site for the new plant lacks commercially viable limestone deposits and would still depend on resources from their land.

They also rejected what they called an “unauthorised and self-appointed committee” allegedly acting in their name, warning that they would resist any attempt to reduce Nigercem to a mere limestone excavation zone or to bypass existing legal rights through political manipulation.

In their appeal, the communities urged Governor Nwifuru to halt any action affecting ownership, mineral rights or control of Nigercem Plc and to convene an inclusive town hall meeting involving traditional rulers, professionals, youth and women groups, religious leaders and other stakeholders to transparently determine the company’s future.

As of the time of filing, the Ebonyi State Government had not issued an official response. However, the communities said they remain open to dialogue, expressing confidence in the governor’s sense of justice and statesmanship.

The unfolding dispute raises critical questions about resource control, investor confidence, community rights, and state-government intervention in Nigeria’s extractive sector. Observers warn that failure to address the grievances transparently could trigger renewed legal battles and social tensions in Ebonyi State.

Is Iran Facing a New Uprising? How Nationwide Protests, Internet Blackouts and Reza Pahlavi’s Call Are Challenging Khamenei’s Rule

Iran was gripped by renewed nationwide protests on Thursday night as demonstrators poured into the streets of Tehran and other cities following a call for mass action by exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi. Witnesses reported chanting from rooftops and in neighbourhoods, while authorities quickly moved to cut internet access and telephone lines, a tactic historically used ahead of harsh crackdowns.

The demonstrations marked a significant escalation in unrest driven largely by economic hardship, currency collapse, and public anger at Iran’s political system. They also represented the first major test of whether Pahlavi—whose father was overthrown in the 1979 Islamic Revolution—could mobilise meaningful opposition inside the country. Protests had already erupted the previous day in cities and rural towns, with markets and bazaars closing in solidarity.

According to the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, at least 41 people have been killed and more than 2,270 detained since the protests began. Monitoring groups such as Cloudflare and NetBlocks reported widespread digital shutdowns, attributing them to government interference. Calls to Iran from abroad reportedly failed, a sign often preceding intensified security operations.

Despite the scale of the unrest, the movement has remained largely leaderless, prompting debate over whether it can sustain momentum or force political change. Analysts note that previous protest waves faltered due to the absence of a unified leadership structure, as Iran’s security apparatus has historically arrested, exiled, or silenced potential opposition figures.

At the appointed protest hour, chants echoed across Tehran: “Death to the dictator!” “Death to the Islamic Republic!” and slogans calling for the return of the monarchy. In a statement, Pahlavi urged Iranians to continue demonstrating, declaring that “the eyes of the world are upon you,” and warning authorities that repression would not go unnoticed internationally.

Iranian officials have not publicly acknowledged the full scope of the unrest, though state-linked media confirmed casualties among security forces. Reports from the judiciary and semi-official outlets said police officers and Revolutionary Guard members were killed in separate attacks in provinces including Kermanshah, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, and Khorasan Razavi. Hard-line media also circulated warnings that security agencies could use drones to identify protesters.

The unrest comes amid deepening economic strain. Following tighter sanctions and the aftermath of a brief war, Iran’s currency collapsed in December to about 1.4 million rials to the U.S. dollar, triggering renewed demonstrations and calls for an end to clerical rule. U.S. President Donald Trump warned that Washington would respond if peaceful protesters were violently repressed, a statement Iran’s Foreign Ministry dismissed as “hypocritical interference.”

Meanwhile, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi remains imprisoned, with her family saying the protests echo earlier uprisings in 2009 and 2019, each demanding an end to what they describe as a “dictatorial religious regime.”

As unrest spreads and communication blackouts deepen, pressing questions remain: Can these protests break the cycle of repression? Will Reza Pahlavi emerge as a unifying figure or remain symbolic? And is Iran approaching a turning point—or another crackdown? With anger rising and the government tightening control, the unfolding crisis is shaping up as one of the most serious challenges to Iran’s leadership in years.

Looking to buy weed online in Canada? Visit here
Discover a better way to buy weed online in Canada with Toking Teepee. Shop premium cannabis flowers, edibles, concentrates, and vapes, all shipped fast and discreet nationwide. Enjoy competitive pricing, secure ordering, and reliable customer support from a trusted source Canadians choose for quality, convenience, and a smooth online shopping experience every single time online.
https://tokingteepee.com/product-category/buy-weed-online-in-canada/

Roofing Screw Suppliers in India for quality fasteners

Roofing screws are essential for strong fastening in metal roofs and industrial structures. BDN Fasteners India is among the trusted Roofing Screw Suppliers in India, delivering fasteners designed for durability, grip, and weather protection. Their products undergo strict quality checks to ensure stable installation and long service life. Ideal for warehouses, factories, commercial buildings, and modular construction.

https://bdnfastenersindia.com/self-drilling-screws.php

Can a Business Owner Detain Drivers Without a Court Order? How an Abia Solar Panel Dispute Turned Into Alleged Illegal Detention, Vehicle Seizure and a Growing Human Rights Outcry

A commercial disagreement over damaged solar panels has escalated into a potential human rights controversy in Bende, Abia State, after two drivers were allegedly held for more than 10 days without a court order by a company executive demanding compensation. The case has raised troubling questions about the legality of “self-help” in business disputes and whether private citizens can lawfully restrict movement or seize property outside the courts.

The drivers, Michael and Mutiu Ade, say they have been confined since December 28, 2025, at the private residence of Martin Mbaka, Managing Director and CEO of Quietstorm Group, after seven solar panels delivered to the premises were found cracked. They allege their vehicle—belonging to Dr. Adeleke Oshin—was immobilised, tyres deflated, keys taken, and that they were forced to sleep inside the bus under harsh conditions, with their freedom of movement restricted.

According to the drivers, the panels were already cracked during loading in Lagos, and they were assured by the sender that the owner was aware. However, upon arrival in Abia, they claim the gate was locked after offloading and they were told they would not be allowed to leave unless the damaged panels were replaced or paid for. “This is a civil issue, but we are being detained like criminals,” Michael said, adding that appeals, pleas and even attempts at police intervention have not secured their release.

Mr. Mbaka confirmed that the vehicle remains in his custody, insisting that ₦840,000 must be paid or replacement panels provided before it is released. His personal assistant, Franklin Azubike, rejected allegations of unlawful detention, arguing that the transporter was negligent, that the solar equipment was worth ₦30–40 million, and that the damaged panels resulted from improper loading alongside other goods. The company says it merely seeks compensation for losses and denies any wrongdoing.

However, human rights lawyers and civil society advocates strongly dispute that position. Legal experts stress that no private individual has the authority to detain another person, restrict movement, or seize property over a civil dispute. Claims for damages, they argue, must be pursued through the courts, not by force or confinement. The drivers maintain that they do not own the vehicle and should not be punished for a disagreement between buyer and sender.

As of the time of reporting, there has been no official statement from the Abia State Police Command on whether the continued detention is under investigation. Rights groups are now calling for urgent intervention to secure the drivers’ freedom and ensure that any compensation claims are resolved strictly within the law.

The case has sparked wider concern about a dangerous trend of turning business disputes into extrajudicial punishment. It raises critical questions: Can a company executive legally hold people and property over a commercial disagreement? Where does civil liability end and unlawful detention begin? And what protections exist for ordinary workers caught between powerful interests? As the drivers continue to plead for their liberty, the incident has become a test of rule of law, personal freedom, and accountability in Nigeria’s commercial and security landscape.

Why Is Tinubu Budgeting Another ₦7bn for Aso Rock Solar While Nigerians Face Blackouts? After ₦10bn in 2025, Is the Presidency Prioritising Itself Over the National Power Crisis?

Amid worsening electricity shortages across Nigeria, the Bola Tinubu-led federal government has allocated another ₦7 billion in the 2026 budget for the solarisation of the Presidential Villa, Aso Rock, raising fresh questions about priorities, equity, and governance. The new allocation—listed by the Budget Office of the Federation under State House expenditures as “provision of solarisation of Villa with solar mini grid”—comes just a year after ₦10 billion was set aside for the same project in 2025.

The decision has reignited public debate because it contrasts sharply with the everyday reality of millions of Nigerians who continue to endure persistent blackouts, business disruptions, and rising energy costs. Critics argue that while the Presidency secures reliable power through a premium solar project, households and small enterprises remain at the mercy of an unstable national grid.

In April 2025, when the initial ₦10 billion allocation triggered public outrage, the Presidency defended the project as a long-term investment in sustainability and energy efficiency. Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga said the move follows “global standards,” citing the White House’s use of solar power and insisting the administration was not “reinventing the wheel” but adopting a tested model for powering critical institutions. Supporters of the project also frame it as a smart hedge against grid failures and a step toward cleaner energy.

Yet the timing has kept the controversy alive. The latest budget increase coincides with a series of national grid collapses that have plunged much of the country into darkness. According to data from the Nigerian Independent System Operator (NISO), one major disturbance saw total power generation crash from 2,052.37MW to just 139.92MW within one hour, leaving only three of the country’s 11 distribution companies able to take any load. At different points, major DisCos—including Eko, Ikeja, Enugu, Jos, Kaduna, Kano, Port Harcourt and Yola—recorded zero allocation, underscoring the fragility of the system.

Independent monitoring confirmed that even hours after such collapses, national supply remained severely constrained, with total available power far below what is needed to sustain homes, hospitals, businesses, and critical services. Similar incidents in March and September 2025 followed earlier government celebrations of rising generation, only for output to plunge again below sustainable levels.

Against this backdrop, many Nigerians question whether investing billions to guarantee uninterrupted electricity for the seat of power—while the wider grid remains unreliable—signals a two-tier energy policy. Some see the solar project as an admission that government itself no longer trusts the national power system it oversees. Others argue that the Presidency’s energy security should not come at a time when ordinary citizens face daily outages, rising fuel costs for generators, and an economy already under strain.

The debate now centres on urgent questions: Is the Tinubu administration protecting Aso Rock while the country stays in the dark? Should scarce public funds be channelled first into stabilising the national grid rather than insulating the Presidency? And does repeated spending—₦17 billion across two years—reflect forward-looking sustainability or misplaced priorities in the middle of a power crisis? As Nigeria’s electricity infrastructure continues to falter, the Aso Rock solar budget has become a powerful symbol in a wider argument about leadership, accountability, and who truly benefits from government policy.

Is Peter Obi a ‘Political Traveller’ Gifted a Presidential Ticket? Why Labour Party VP Candidate Datti Baba-Ahmed Is Challenging Obi’s ADC Move and Declaring His Own 2027 Ambition

Former Labour Party vice-presidential candidate Yusuf Datti Baba-Ahmed has launched a pointed political broadside that appears directed at his former principal, Peter Obi, following Obi’s decision to join the African Democratic Congress (ADC) coalition. Without naming him directly, Baba-Ahmed described Obi and other defecting politicians as “political travellers” who were “gifted a presidential ticket,” igniting fresh debate over loyalty, leadership, and the future of Nigeria’s opposition ahead of 2027.

Speaking while declaring his intention to run for president, Baba-Ahmed insisted that he remains firmly within the Labour Party (LP), arguing that the party already “won a presidential election” and still represents a credible alternative to Nigeria’s dominant political blocs. He dismissed the ADC coalition as a gathering of “disgruntled politicians” who failed to properly challenge alleged constitutional breaches in the 2023 elections, questioning whether such alliances truly offer reform or merely recycle old power structures.

At the heart of his message was a bold economic promise: Baba-Ahmed said that by June 2027, salaries of public servants—especially security personnel and teachers—would be quadrupled, insisting that “Nigeria can afford it.” He framed this pledge as a moral obligation to workers often overlooked despite their critical role in national stability and development.

Positioning himself as a political outlier, Baba-Ahmed challenged rivals to produce “just one” major presidential aspirant who has never belonged to a ruling party. “I am that one,” he declared, stressing his independence and rejecting what he described as opportunistic movement between power centres. He added that he has no intention of joining any ruling party—except one he hopes to lead through the ballot.

The former LP vice-presidential candidate also pushed back against claims that defections are weakening the Labour Party, saying neither he nor the party is responsible. According to him, individuals welcomed into LP in 2022 “with a presidential ticket” merely continued their political journey elsewhere. He urged supporters to “use the truth” amid what he called increasingly hostile online narratives.

Recounting political history, Baba-Ahmed asserted that he aspired to the presidency before Peter Obi, citing events from 2018 when he contested in the PDP primaries and personally sought Obi’s support. While he spoke respectfully of Obi’s character, the implication was clear: leadership ambition, he argued, did not originate with his former running mate.

Baba-Ahmed also highlighted Labour Party’s achievements despite financial constraints and what he termed “an era of perfected electoral fraud,” pointing to the party’s electoral gains—one state governor, eight senators, and around 40 House of Representatives members—as proof of its growing national footprint.

The controversy now raises pressing political questions: Is Peter Obi abandoning the movement that propelled him in 2023? Does the ADC coalition represent a genuine opposition realignment or a gathering of familiar political actors? And can Datti Baba-Ahmed’s pledge of economic reform, party loyalty, and outsider status reshape Nigeria’s 2027 presidential race? As realignments continue, the Labour Party faces a defining moment over identity, leadership, and the path forward in Nigeria’s evolving political landscape.

Is the U.S. Turning Its Back on the United Nations? Why UN Chief Guterres Regrets Trump’s Withdrawal From Dozens of Global Bodies and What It Means for World Governance

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has expressed strong regret over the United States’ decision to withdraw from multiple international organisations, warning that financial obligations to the UN remain legally binding under international law. The reaction follows a sweeping policy directive signed by U.S. President Donald Trump, ordering American withdrawal from 66 international bodies, including 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-UN organisations.

In a statement delivered by UN Spokesman Stéphane Dujarric, the Secretary-General described the decision as “regrettable” and stressed that assessed contributions to the UN’s regular and peacekeeping budgets are mandatory under the UN Charter for all member states, including the United States. “Assessed contributions… are a legal obligation under the UN Charter,” Dujarric said, adding that all UN agencies would continue implementing their mandates despite political or financial challenges.

While the UN statement did not specify which bodies would be affected or the immediate financial consequences, officials have long warned that funding shortfalls could undermine peacekeeping operations, humanitarian assistance, development programmes, and human-rights initiatives worldwide.

The development stems from a Presidential Memorandum issued by Trump, declaring that continued U.S. participation in the listed organisations no longer serves American interests. The directive follows a comprehensive review ordered under Executive Order 14199 in February 2025, which assessed U.S. involvement in all international organisations, treaties, and conventions receiving American funding or support. After reviewing the findings with his Cabinet, Trump ordered federal agencies to take “immediate steps” to withdraw, where legally permissible.

Among the non-UN organisations affected are bodies dealing with climate change, energy, environmental protection, democracy promotion, cybersecurity, and regional cooperation, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and the Freedom Online Coalition. The order also targets several security and justice-focused groups, such as the Global Counterterrorism Forum and the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law.

On the UN side, the memorandum directs the United States to cease participation in or funding for multiple agencies and programmes, including UN Women, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and offices focused on peacebuilding, development, oceans, water, international law, and human rights. It also affects entities such as the Peacebuilding Fund, UN Water, UN Oceans, and the UN University system.

Despite the decision, the UN leadership insists its mission will continue. “All United Nations entities will go on with the implementation of their mandates as given by Member States,” the statement said, underscoring the organisation’s responsibility to people worldwide who rely on its work.

The move has intensified global debate: Can the United States legally withdraw while still bound to financial obligations? Will UN programmes suffer operational setbacks? Does this signal a broader retreat from multilateralism—or a recalibration of U.S. foreign policy priorities? As the review process remains ongoing, with more organisations potentially targeted, the episode raises urgent questions about the future of international cooperation, global governance, and the stability of multilateral institutions.

Is Community Justice Taking Over the Law? Why Women in Anambra Banished an Elderly Man Over an Alleged Rape and What It Means for Due Process

Women from the Egbema Ozubulu community in Anambra State have reportedly banished an elderly man accused of raping a married woman, invoking what they described as a traditional form of communal justice. The incident, which took place in Uruezi Egbema, Ozubulu, Ekwusigo Local Government Area, drew widespread attention after videos of the action circulated on social media.

In the footage, the women were seen escorting the elderly man to the outskirts of the community while chanting “onye ohi otu”, an Igbo phrase translated as “private parts thief.” According to eyewitnesses, the women collectively declared him unfit to remain in the community following the allegation.

An anonymous source told reporters that the action was taken after the alleged victim reported the incident to community members. “The women said they could not tolerate such an abomination in the land. They believed sending him away was necessary to cleanse the community,” the source said. Another resident explained that the response followed long-standing customs, noting that in cases involving serious sexual allegations—especially against married women—women in the community traditionally take charge and enforce sanctions.

As of the time of reporting, the Anambra State Police Command had not confirmed whether the case had been formally reported or whether an official investigation had begun. Attempts to reach the police spokesperson were unsuccessful, while a police source stated that although the command had seen the circulating videos, no formal complaint had yet been filed, urging the public to report criminal matters for proper investigation.

The development has triggered mixed reactions online. While some Nigerians praised the women for taking a bold stand against sexual violence and abuse, others expressed concern about the absence of due process, warning that community-led punishment could undermine the legal system and the presumption of innocence.

As debate grows, questions remain: Should traditional justice systems intervene where formal law enforcement has not acted? Does community action protect victims or risk replacing lawful investigation with mob justice? And will authorities step in to review or reverse the banishment? The incident has reignited national discussion about the balance between cultural practices, women’s collective resistance to sexual violence, and the rule of law in Nigeria.

Did an Ondo DPO Assault a Lawyer at a Police Station? Why a Law Firm Has Petitioned the IGP and Police Service Commission Over Alleged Abuse of Power

A Lagos- and Ondo-based law firm, Tope Temokun Chambers, has petitioned the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the Police Service Commission (PSC), and other oversight bodies over allegations of assault, intimidation, abuse of office, and obstruction of justice involving the Divisional Police Officer (DPO) of Ore Division in Ondo State, Mr. Moses Adeduro.

According to the petitions, the incident occurred on January 8, 2026, when one of the firm’s lawyers, Adedotun Emmanuel Adegoroye, Esq., accompanied a client—Mrs. Stella Oluwasegun, Managing Director of Niret Marketing Product Company Limited—to the Ore Divisional Police Station to formally report a case of alleged stealing and criminal conversion of company goods valued at about ₦20.4 million.

The firm stated that the complaint followed the discovery that some employees of the company, allegedly acting in collaboration with a supplier’s staff and a driver, unlawfully removed and sold company goods. It added that some receivers of the allegedly stolen items had already been arrested prior to the visit.

However, the law firm alleged that upon arrival at the police station, officers attempted to coerce the complainant into an informal settlement without first taking her statement or properly documenting the complaint. When their counsel reportedly objected and insisted on due process, he was directed to see the DPO.

What happened next, according to the petition, escalated into intimidation and physical assault. The firm alleged that the DPO dismissed the presence of legal representation, reportedly stating that lawyers were not needed at the police station, and ordered that the lawyer be forcibly removed from his office. In the process, a police officer was said to have physically grabbed and ejected the lawyer.

Tope Temokun Chambers described the alleged conduct as a grave abuse of office, an unlawful assault on a legal practitioner, and a deliberate attempt to obstruct justice. The firm argued that the actions violated multiple laws, including the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Police Act and Regulations, and the Legal Practitioners Act, all of which guarantee citizens’ right to legal representation and protect lawyers in the lawful discharge of their duties.

In its petitions, the firm demanded:

An immediate and thorough investigation into the conduct of the DPO and other officers involved, with appropriate disciplinary measures if the allegations are proven;

A formal written apology to the affected lawyer; and

That the underlying criminal complaint be taken over by higher police authorities to ensure impartial investigation and public confidence.


The firm further claimed it had been reliably informed of similar complaints of misconduct previously made against the same DPO, raising concerns about a possible pattern of abuse of authority.

Emphasising that the petitions were filed in the interest of justice and professionalism, the firm stressed that lawyers must be allowed to perform their duties without fear of harassment, violence, or intimidation, urging authorities to act decisively to uphold the rule of law and restore confidence in the Nigeria Police Force.

Is Congress Trying to Stop Trump’s War in Venezuela? Inside the US Senate Vote to Restrict Military Action

The United States Senate has passed a War Powers resolution by a narrow 52–48 vote, seeking to restrict President Donald Trump’s military action in Venezuela and reassert Congress’s constitutional authority over the use of force abroad. The resolution reflects rising unease among lawmakers about the scope of presidential war powers and the legality of recent U.S. operations targeting the Venezuelan government.

The move follows a dramatic escalation in U.S.–Venezuela relations, including reports that the Trump administration carried out an operation that abducted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, an action said to have resulted in at least 100 deaths. The development triggered global reactions and reignited domestic debate over whether the president can deploy military force without explicit approval from Congress.

Supporters of the resolution argue that it is designed to check executive overreach and prevent the United States from sliding into another open-ended foreign conflict. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer stated that the measure was intended to halt what he described as “military adventurism” and to restore Congress’s role as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. He criticized the administration’s foreign policy approach, warning that Americans do not want their resources—or lives—spent on wars without clear justification or accountability.

Despite its passage in the Senate, the resolution now faces a major test in the House of Representatives, where approval is required before it can be sent to the president. Even if the House passes it, President Trump retains the power to veto the measure, meaning a two-thirds majority in both chambers would be necessary to override such a decision. Analysts note that while the resolution’s future is uncertain, its success in the Senate signals a renewed effort by lawmakers to challenge the expansion of presidential war-making authority.

The vote highlights a broader constitutional question: Who truly controls America’s military actions abroad—the president or Congress? As tensions with Venezuela intensify and international scrutiny grows, the outcome of this legislative battle could shape not only U.S. policy toward Venezuela but also the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches.

With political divisions deepening and global attention fixed on Washington, the coming House debate may determine whether Congress can effectively rein in the president’s authority—or whether Trump’s approach to Venezuela will continue unchecked.

Malami Delays Bail as DSS Besiege Kuje Prison Over Terrorism Financing Probe – Inside the High-Stakes Showdown

Former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), has reportedly slowed the processing of his bail following a heavy deployment of Department of State Services (DSS) operatives at the Kuje Medium Security Custodial Centre (MSCC) in Abuja. Sources indicate that over 50 DSS officers established a perimeter around the prison, arriving in a convoy of approximately six Toyota Hilux vans, amid fears that Malami could be immediately rearrested in connection with an ongoing terrorism financing investigation.

Malami, who was granted bail by the Federal High Court in Abuja in his N8.7 billion money laundering case, instructed his legal team to delay the release process, remaining in the VIP segregation cell of the prison, a section previously refurbished by former police intelligence chief Abba Kyari and known for housing high-profile detainees. His son, Abubakar Abdulaziz, and fourth wife, Hajia Bashir Asabe, remain at the facility, with Abdulaziz reportedly admitted to the prison clinic for observation after falling ill.

The EFCC had arraigned Malami, Asabe, and Abdulaziz on a 16-count charge involving conspiracy, laundering, and concealment of unlawful proceeds totaling ₦8,713,923,759.49 under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022. While terrorism financing is not part of the formal charges, security sources link ongoing investigations to Malami and other high-profile figures regarding the flow of Abacha loot recovered from Switzerland and the UK.

Retired Army General Danjuma Ali-Keffi, former head of counter-terrorism Task Force Operation Service Wide (OSW), revealed that investigations into Boko Haram financiers exposed networks allegedly connected to senior military officers, top financial officials, and government figures, including Malami. Ali-Keffi claimed Malami interfered with these investigations by removing key prosecutors and influencing the release of certain suspects, actions that undermined anti-terrorism operations.

This unfolding situation underscores heightened tensions between Nigerian law enforcement agencies and high-profile figures, highlighting the complex interplay of money laundering, terrorism financing probes, and political influence. Authorities remain on high alert as Malami’s legal maneuvering continues amid nationwide scrutiny of his activities.

NDLEA Declares Delta Man Jerry John Edhekρo ‘King Jerry’ Wanted Over Drug Trafficking – What You Need to Know

The National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) has officially declared Jerry John Edhekρo, also known as Jerry or King Jerry, wanted for his alleged involvement in multiple drug trafficking activities. According to the agency, Edhekρo is a Nigerian national from Iyede Town, Isoko North Local Government Area of Delta State, and is currently under investigation for several illicit drug offences.

The NDLEA released a statement accompanied by the suspect’s photograph, urging members of the public to provide credible information leading to his arrest. Citizens with knowledge of his whereabouts are encouraged to contact the nearest NDLEA command or use the agency’s toll-free helpline.

The agency emphasized that Edhekρo’s declaration as wanted followed intelligence reports and ongoing operations connecting him to multiple illegal drug transactions. In the statement, NDLEA reaffirmed its commitment to intelligence-led operations targeting drug traffickers, warning that individuals involved in drug-related crimes would face legal action.

Officials described the suspect as a Black Nigerian male and reiterated the agency’s determination to track down and bring suspects involved in drug trafficking and related offences to justice. The NDLEA also urged residents to assist law enforcement in curbing drug crimes by reporting suspicious activity promptly.

This announcement underscores the NDLEA’s active campaign against drug trafficking in Nigeria, and the agency’s insistence on public cooperation reflects the seriousness of its ongoing efforts to dismantle criminal networks involved in narcotics.

With drug-related crime posing significant threats to public safety and community well-being, the agency continues to deploy strategic operations across the country, reinforcing its mandate to protect citizens from the dangers of illicit drugs.

Is Superstition Holding Nigerian Communities Hostage? How Fear of ‘Poison,’ Rituals, and Dog Poop Is Fueling Paranoia, Poverty, and Exploitation – By Leo Igwe

Is superstition silently destroying communities in Nigeria—and why are fear, paranoia, and ritual beliefs still shaping how people interpret illness, death, and misfortune?

In this powerful and unsettling account, Leo Igwe recounts his return to his hometown in southeastern Nigeria after decades away, where he encountered what he describes as the toxic grip of superstition and irrational fear on everyday life. From the moment he arrived, Igwe says he witnessed how ordinary health issues were being interpreted as the work of unseen enemies using “poison,” spiritual attacks, or occult forces.

A family housekeeper with a swollen hand claimed he had “picked up poison” while farming—an explanation widely accepted by community members, despite no one being able to describe what the poison was, how it worked, or where it came from. Rather than seeking medical help, the man was subjected to prayers, spiritual pressing, and ritual interventions, which only worsened the condition. For Igwe, this was a troubling reminder of how medical problems are often rebranded as spiritual attacks, delaying proper treatment and deepening fear.

But why does this mindset persist? Igwe explains that in his community, no one is believed to die naturally. Death, illness, stroke, or paralysis are frequently attributed to enemies—often relatives or neighbors—who are accused of using occult means. Phrases like “they have killed him” or “they have finally gotten him” dominate conversations, reinforcing suspicion and tearing families apart. People live in constant fear that someone has planted spiritual “poisons” that they might step on or touch.

Despite identifying as Christians, many residents, Igwe notes, move between churches, prophets, pastors, traditional priests, and ritual specialists. They pray to Jesus, invoke ancestors, hire “prayer warriors,” and perform sacrifices in an endless cycle of spiritual protection. But does this offer safety—or does it deepen exploitation? Igwe argues that this climate has created fertile ground for con artists, fake prophets, and self-styled spiritual practitioners who extract money in exchange for deliverance, exorcism, and supposed protection.

One striking episode involved a roaming prayer man who went from house to house, collecting food or money after loud, theatrical prayers. In another home, Igwe witnessed a dramatic ritual in which sand was placed in people’s hands while God was commanded to “open doors,” even instructing someone to physically open the living room door to symbolize prosperity. To Igwe, this performance illustrated how faith is manipulated into spectacle while poverty remains unchanged.

Perhaps the most disturbing moment came when a neighbor reported that dog feces found in their compound was not ordinary waste but a weapon of spiritual harm. The family believed it had been ritually placed to bring sickness or death—just as, they claimed, their parents had previously been killed. The response? Olive oil poured on it, urine used as a neutralizer, and the case escalated to village authorities. To Igwe, this episode captured how fear transforms harmless events into imagined threats, driving communities deeper into paranoia.

Addressing a village meeting, Igwe warned of the dangerous consequences of baseless accusations, superstition, and occult blame, citing how such beliefs have destroyed families and communities across the region. He urged residents to free themselves from irrational fear and confront the social damage caused by suspicion, exploitation, and magical thinking.

So what is the real cost of these beliefs? According to Igwe, communities trapped in superstition remain locked in poverty, fear, and manipulation, unable to address real health, economic, and social challenges. The essay ultimately asks a haunting question: Can communities break free from the cycle of fear before superstition consumes trust, development, and human dignity?

Is the Okada Ban Being Enforced Again in Abuja? Police Impound 21 Motorcycles, Arrest Riders as Security Agencies Crack Down on Restricted Roads

Is the long-standing ban on commercial motorcycles finally being enforced with renewed force in Abuja—and what does it mean for commuters, riders, and public safety in the nation’s capital?

The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Police Command, working with other security agencies, has impounded 21 commercial motorcycles and arrested their riders for violating restrictions on motorcycle operations along major roads and highways in Abuja. The enforcement, carried out on Thursday under the Operation Sweep initiative alongside officials of the Vehicle Inspection Office (VIO), targeted key corridors where commercial motorcyclists—popularly known as okada riders—were found flouting existing traffic and security laws.

According to a statement issued by the Police Public Relations Officer, Josephine Adeh, the arrested riders and seized motorcycles were apprehended strictly in line with “extant laws guiding traffic and security operations” in the FCT. The police described the action as part of a sustained inter-agency strategy aimed at curbing traffic-related crimes, preventing the use of commercial motorcycles for criminal activities, and strengthening public safety across Abuja.

But is this operation merely routine traffic enforcement—or a signal of a broader security clampdown? Authorities say the ban on commercial motorcycles along major highways remains in force, citing persistent concerns over accidents, robbery, and the ease with which criminals can use motorcycles to evade arrest. By focusing on major roads and restricted routes, the agencies involved insist they are prioritizing both road safety and crime prevention.

Reacting to the operation, the Commissioner of Police, FCT Command, Miller Dantawaye, reaffirmed the command’s commitment to strict enforcement of all traffic and security regulations designed to protect lives and property. He warned that continued defiance of the motorcycle ban would attract “decisive enforcement actions”, adding that similar operations would be intensified across the six Area Councils of the FCT.

The police also urged residents to cooperate with security agencies, comply with traffic directives, and promptly report suspicious activities through official emergency lines. Yet, questions remain: Will sustained enforcement reduce crime and accidents, or will it deepen the economic hardship of riders who rely on commercial motorcycles for survival? How will commuters in underserved areas cope with limited transport options if restrictions tighten further?

As Abuja grapples with balancing security, mobility, and livelihoods, the latest crackdown has reignited debate over the future of commercial motorcycles in the capital—testing whether enforcement alone can deliver safer roads without leaving thousands of riders stranded.

Is Ondo’s Governor Above the Law? Outrage as Commissioner Decorates Gov Aiyedatiwa at Public Event Despite Court Order for Her Arrest

Is the rule of law being deliberately undermined in Ondo State, and why was a commissioner facing a court-ordered arrest allowed to appear publicly with the governor?

Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa has come under intense public criticism after his Commissioner for Women Affairs, Mrs Seun Osamaye, was seen participating in an official state event and decorating him with the 2026 National Armed Forces Remembrance Emblem, despite a subsisting court order directing her arrest and remand.

The controversy stems from a ruling delivered on December 31, 2025, by a Magistrate Court in Ondo State, which ordered the arrest and imprisonment of Mrs Osamaye over allegations of assault, intimidation, and threats against a serving Chief Magistrate, Mrs Temitope Alphonso. According to court records, the commissioner was accused of verbally and physically confronting the magistrate during an official visit to the Ministry of Women Affairs following a judgment that was reportedly unfavourable to her.

Public outrage erupted after photographs of the commissioner at Wednesday’s event circulated on social media. Legal commentators noted that no court order had vacated or overturned the ruling, and that the magistrates’ indefinite strike in Ondo State made it impossible for any judicial review to have lawfully taken place. “The order remains valid and enforceable,” one observer said, describing the public appearance as “a slap on the judiciary.”

Critics questioned how a public official facing a lawful arrest order could be allowed to take part in a high-profile state function—especially one honouring the governor, who is constitutionally bound to uphold the law. “How can a governor permit an appointee who ought to be in custody to decorate him in public?” one source asked, calling the episode “a show of shame” and evidence of “disrespect and disregard for the rule of law.”

Court documents allege that Mrs Osamaye verbally abused and threatened Magistrate Alphonso, reportedly telling her to “shut up,” referring to her as “a mere magistrate,” and boasting that even the Chief Judge of Ondo State could not challenge her authority. The affidavit further claims she issued threats suggesting the magistrate could be made to “go missing,” actions described as intimidation and abuse of political influence.

Mrs Osamaye failed to appear in court on the hearing date. Her counsel submitted a medical report claiming she was receiving treatment, but the presiding magistrate, Mr Damilola Sekoni, rejected the document for lacking essential details. He subsequently ordered her arrest and remand, citing what he described as a clear disregard for the authority of the court, and adjourned the matter to January 12.

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Akure Branch, has since called on Governor Aiyedatiwa to suspend the commissioner to allow her face prosecution without interference. The NBA warned that the alleged conduct, if proven, constitutes a direct attack on judicial independence and a dangerous erosion of public confidence in the justice system.

The episode has raised urgent questions:
Did the Ondo State Government knowingly disregard a valid court order?
What message does this send about accountability and equality before the law?
And can public trust in the judiciary survive when court directives appear openly defied?

As legal bodies demand action and citizens express outrage, the controversy has become a critical test of rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic accountability in Ondo State.