Why Are Nigerians Being Killed Abroad? Did New Year Violence in the UK and Canada Expose Growing Dangers for Nigerians in the Diaspora, as NiDCOM Mourns Two Victims? Are Nigerians in the diaspora becoming increasingly unsafe? The Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM) has expressed deep sorrow over the killing of two Nigerians in separate violent incidents in the United Kingdom and Canada in the early days of the new year, raising renewed concerns about the security of Nigerians living abroad. In a statement issued on behalf of the Commission’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Abike Dabiri-Erewa, NiDCOM described the deaths as shocking and deeply troubling. The Commission noted that the incidents highlight growing fears over the vulnerability of Nigerians in foreign countries, even in societies often perceived as safer. Dabiri-Erewa extended heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, and loved ones of the victims, urging them to remain strong in the face of the tragic loss. While commending the prompt actions of the UK Metropolitan Police and the Toronto Police Service, she called for thorough, transparent, and timely investigations to ensure that those responsible are identified and brought to justice. According to reports, one of the victims, John Temitope Onetufo, a 23-year-old Nigerian, was fatally stabbed on New Year’s Eve in the Lewisham area of London. In a separate incident, Osemwengie Irorere, a 46-year-old Nigerian, was shot and killed at the Yorkdale GO Bus Terminal in Toronto, Canada, on Sunday, January 4. Both cases occurred within days of each other, amplifying anxiety within Nigerian communities abroad. NiDCOM further assured the public that it would work closely with the Nigerian High Commissions in the United Kingdom and Canada to provide all necessary support to the bereaved families, in line with the Commission’s mandate to safeguard the welfare and interests of Nigerians living outside the country. Beyond condolences, the tragedy has reignited a critical national conversation: Are existing diplomatic and consular protections enough to keep Nigerians abroad safe? Human rights advocates and diaspora groups argue that recurring reports of violent deaths, discrimination, and insecurity demand stronger international engagement, improved community policing partnerships, and better support systems for Nigerians facing risks overseas. As investigations continue, many Nigerians are asking whether these killings are isolated criminal acts—or part of a disturbing pattern affecting Africans and immigrants in Western societies. For families left behind and a diaspora already on edge, the pressing question remains: What more can be done to ensure that Nigerians seeking opportunity abroad do not pay the ultimate price?

Is IGP Kayode Egbetokun Headed to Prison? Can Nigeria’s Police Chief Be Jailed for Defying Court Orders Over SARS Abduction and Disappearance of Lagos Resident? Is Nigeria’s top police officer facing imprisonment for ignoring a federal court? The Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, now risks being committed to Kuje Correctional Centre after allegedly refusing to comply with binding court orders concerning the abduction and disappearance of John Chukwuemeka Anozie, a Lagos resident taken from his Lekki home in June 2017. Legal action was initiated by Vincent Adodo, counsel to Anozie’s wife, who has filed contempt proceedings against the IGP for what he describes as persistent disobedience of a subsisting judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja. The ruling, delivered on September 24, 2025 by Justice Binta Nyako, arose from a Freedom of Information (FOI) suit filed by Mrs. Nnenna Anozie after years of unanswered requests for investigation records relating to her husband’s disappearance. In its judgment, the court ordered the IGP—who failed to file any defence—to produce for prosecution former officers of the now-defunct Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) from Akwuzu, Anambra State, accused of abducting Anozie. The court further awarded ₦2 million in damages against the IGP for refusing to release investigation reports and directed him to forward both the police investigation file and the legal opinion recommending prosecution to the Attorney General of the Federation. The judgment explicitly noted that police authorities had failed to prosecute the officers despite an internal legal opinion recommending criminal charges. Those listed include ASP Anthony Obiozor Ikechukwu, Sgt. Uzochukwu Emeana, John Eze, Oriole (aka T-Boy), and SP Sunday Okpe. Yet months after being served with the court order in October 2025, the IGP has allegedly neither prosecuted the officers nor paid the ₦2 million damages. In response, Anozie’s lawyer triggered enforcement by serving the police chief with Form 48 (Notice of Consequences of Disobedience) and Form 49 (Notice of Committal to Prison)—legal steps that can result in imprisonment for contempt of court. Court filings now show that Mrs. Anozie is seeking an order to commit the IGP to prison until he obeys the court by releasing certified investigation reports, transmitting the case file to the Attorney General, handing over the indicted officers for prosecution, and paying the damages awarded. The matter is scheduled for hearing on February 9, 2025, when the IGP is expected to “show cause” why he should not be jailed for contempt. Beyond the personal tragedy of a family still searching for answers after eight years, the case raises a larger constitutional question: Can Nigeria’s most powerful police officer be held personally accountable for disobeying court orders? The outcome could set a critical precedent for rule of law, police accountability, and victims’ access to justice in cases of alleged state abuse. As the hearing approaches, legal observers, human rights advocates, and the public are watching closely: Will the judiciary enforce its authority against the nation’s police chief—or will impunity prevail once again?

Is the ‘Christian Genocide’ in Nigeria a Political Narrative? Why Trump Admits Muslims Are Also Killed as Sowore Accuses the U.S. of Using Religion to Justify Power, Oil, and Military Influence Is the narrative of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria an honest reflection of the country’s security crisis—or a political tool shaped by foreign interests? United States President Donald Trump has made a partial shift in his long-standing rhetoric on religious violence in Nigeria, acknowledging that Muslims are also being killed, even while maintaining that Christians remain the primary victims. Trump made the remarks during an interview with The New York Times following questions about Washington’s Christmas Day military strike in northwest Nigeria. The U.S. military said the operation, carried out at the request of the Nigerian government, targeted Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), a Boko Haram splinter group responsible for years of deadly attacks across northern Nigeria. When asked about earlier comments from his own Africa adviser—who had stated that extremist groups in Nigeria kill more Muslims than Christians—Trump responded: “I think that Muslims are being killed also in Nigeria. But it’s mostly Christians.” The statement marked a rare acknowledgment that Nigeria’s victims of terrorism cut across religious lines, even as Trump continued to frame the conflict primarily through a Christian persecution lens. The comments immediately drew a sharp response from Omoyele Sowore, former Nigerian presidential candidate and prominent human rights activist. In a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), Sowore dismissed the “Christian genocide” narrative as a calculated political construct, arguing that it is designed to stir emotion, mobilize conservative audiences abroad, and provide moral cover for foreign military, economic, and geopolitical agendas. Sowore accused Trump of using religion as a rhetorical device while pursuing what he described as imperial interests tied to oil, rare earth minerals, and strategic dominance. “The narrative used to justify it is secondary,” Sowore wrote, adding that such framing only needs to “match the gullibility of the intended audience.” According to him, claims of systematic religious genocide in Nigeria are not grounded in objective reality but are deliberately shaped to occupy a powerful emotional space in Western political discourse. He further challenged Trump’s moral authority to speak on Christian values, asserting that the former U.S. president does not embody the compassion, humility, or solidarity central to the faith he frequently invokes. Sowore argued that Trump’s selective concern for religious identity masks a broader indifference to human suffering—both abroad and at home—unless it aligns with his political interests. The controversy highlights a deeper question: Is Nigeria’s complex security crisis being oversimplified into a religious conflict for international consumption? While jihadist groups like ISWAP and Boko Haram have undeniably targeted Christian communities, they have also killed thousands of Muslims, including traditional leaders, clerics, villagers, and security personnel. Analysts have long warned that framing the violence as exclusively anti-Christian risks distorting reality, inflaming sectarian tensions, and obscuring the political, economic, and territorial dimensions of the conflict. Trump’s admission that Muslims are also victims, even if partial, challenges his earlier absolutist framing. Yet his insistence that Christians remain the main targets continues to fuel debate about whether U.S. policy toward Nigeria is being shaped by faith-based narratives rather than nuanced security analysis. As Nigeria battles insurgency, banditry, and transnational terrorism, the exchange between Trump and Sowore underscores how global power politics, religious identity, and media narratives intersect in shaping international responses to African conflicts. The key question remains: is the world seeing Nigeria’s crisis as it truly is—or as it is most politically useful to portray?

CAPTI Declines Nigeria Police Meeting Over Human Rights Violations by Imo ‘Tiger Base’ Unit The Coalition Against Police Tigerbase Impunity (CAPTI) has declined a scheduled meeting with the Nigeria Police Force’s Police Monitoring Unit at Force Headquarters, Abuja. The coalition cited practical, logistical, and substantive constraints, emphasizing that the short notice and travel requirements made attendance impossible. In a letter signed by Sanyaolu Juwon, CAPTI Coordinator, the group acknowledged the police’s willingness to engage but stressed that any meeting must include victims and their families, many of whom reside in Imo State or are held at Owerri Correctional Centre. CAPTI noted that meaningful engagement requires proper planning, sufficient notice, and clear mechanisms for victim testimonies and accountability. The coalition remains open to dialogue but requested a mutually convenient date with arrangements allowing for inclusive participation of victims and civil society observers. CAPTI has been vocal about alleged abuses by the Tiger Base anti-kidnapping unit, advocating for transparency, accountability, and respect for human rights in Nigerian policing. #CAPTI #TigerBase #HumanRights”

Nigeria Police Summon Rights Group CAPTI Over Alleged Human Rights Abuses by Imo ‘Tiger Base’ Operatives The Nigeria Police Force, through its Police Monitoring Unit at Force Headquarters, Abuja, has summoned the Coalition Against Police Tigerbase Impunity (CAPTI) following a petition detailing alleged torture and human rights abuses by operatives of the Imo State Tiger Base Anti-Kidnapping Unit. The invitation, issued under Reference No: CR: 3000/1GP.SEC/PMU/OPS/ABJ/VOL:/261/78 on January 8, 2026, requested CAPTI representatives and victims’ relatives to attend an interview on January 12, 2026, to provide further details on the allegations. CAPTI, citing short notice, logistical constraints, and the need for adequate preparation, informed the police that it could not attend the scheduled meeting. The rights group, headquartered in Lagos, expressed its commitment to constructive engagement with the Nigeria Police Force while highlighting challenges in mobilizing stakeholders on short notice for a meeting in Abuja. The coalition emphasized the importance of accountability, justice, and protection of citizens’ fundamental rights, while acknowledging the police’s willingness to engage with civil society on matters of public concern. #NigeriaPolice #HumanRights #CAPTI”

Amnesty International Condemns U.S. Withdrawal From 66 International Treaties, Calls Move ‘Reckless Amnesty International has strongly criticized the United States’ decision to withdraw from 66 international organisations, conventions, and treaties, calling the move “a vindictive and reckless assault” on the legitimacy of the United Nations and the multilateral system. In a statement, Erika Guevara Rosas, Amnesty’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns, accused the Trump administration of deliberately undermining global cooperation and international law, including agreements on climate change, human rights, and gender equality. She highlighted the withdrawals from critical bodies such as the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the UN Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, warning that these actions could worsen global instability, deepen human rights abuses, and disproportionately affect marginalized communities worldwide. Amnesty urged UN member states and international institutions to take immediate action to defend the multilateral system, preserve accountability, and protect human rights globally. #HumanRights #UN #ClimateAction”

Is Iran’s Supreme Leader Blaming Protesters to Please Trump as Deadly Unrest, Internet Blackouts and Calls for Regime Change Shake Tehran? Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has accused anti-government protesters of “ruining their own streets to make the president of another country happy,” as nationwide unrest continues to grip Tehran and other major cities despite an unprecedented internet and telephone shutdown. His remarks come amid escalating demonstrations that began over economic hardship but have rapidly evolved into the most serious challenge to Iran’s leadership in years. Short videos circulating on social media before the blackout showed protesters chanting around bonfires, blocking roads, and leaving streets strewn with debris. Iranian state television later blamed the violence on “terrorist agents” backed by the United States and Israel, reporting unspecified “casualties” while offering few details. During a televised address, Khamenei warned of a hardline response, as crowds in the studio chanted “Death to America,” underscoring the regime’s narrative of foreign interference. According to analysts, the protests gained momentum after public appeals by exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who urged Iranians to take to the streets at coordinated times. Holly Dagres of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said the calls had a decisive impact, transforming scattered demonstrations into a nationwide movement aimed at toppling the Islamic Republic. Witnesses in Tehran reported chants of “Death to the dictator,” “Death to the Islamic Republic,” and slogans calling for the return of the Pahlavi monarchy. Pahlavi condemned the government’s decision to shut down communications, warning that cutting internet and landlines was intended to silence the protesters and prevent the world from seeing what was happening inside Iran. He urged international leaders to use “technical, financial, and diplomatic resources” to restore connectivity so that the voices of Iranians could be heard globally. Human rights groups report a growing toll. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency says at least 42 people have been killed and more than 2,270 detained since the protests began. State media acknowledged that private vehicles, public transport, metro stations, and emergency vehicles had been set ablaze during demonstrations, reinforcing claims of widespread unrest. Former U.S. President Donald Trump has also weighed in, warning Tehran against violently suppressing peaceful protesters and threatening severe consequences if the crackdown continues. His comments have fueled speculation that Iran’s leadership is framing the protests as a foreign-backed campaign to delegitimize domestic dissent. As the internet blackout persists and security forces tighten their grip, questions remain: Are Iran’s leaders confronting a genuine popular uprising driven by economic despair and demands for freedom, or will the government succeed in recasting the movement as an externally orchestrated plot? With mounting deaths, mass arrests, and growing international attention, the unfolding crisis could redefine Iran’s political future.

Is Nigeria Criminalising Dissent? Police Arraign Activist Salim Abubakar Over Anti-Government Posts, Court Remands Him Till January 13 The Nigeria Police Force has arraigned activist Salim Abubakar following a petition filed against him at the Central Police Station in Abuja, raising fresh questions about freedom of expression, digital rights, and the growing tension between civic activism and law enforcement in Nigeria. According to police authorities, the petition was received on December 19, 2025, after which Abubakar was repeatedly invited for questioning. Police spokesperson, Benjamin Hundeyin, stated that the activist allegedly ignored several invitations and was subsequently arrested, investigated, and arraigned in court on January 8, 2026. The court, he added, adjourned the matter and ordered that Abubakar be remanded in custody until January 13. However, the arrest has drawn sharp criticism from Amnesty International, which insists that the case is connected to Abubakar’s social media posts criticising government officials. The human rights organisation has described the detention as an abuse of power, arguing that no citizen should be punished for expressing opinions about public office holders. Amnesty said Abubakar committed no crime and demanded his immediate and unconditional release. The organisation further warned that detaining individuals for online criticism undermines the rule of law and violates constitutional guarantees of free expression. It noted that young Nigerians increasingly face threats, harassment, arrests, and detention simply for speaking out on digital platforms—an alarming trend, it said, in a democratic society. While police maintain that the arrest followed due process based on a formal petition and non-compliance with invitations, rights groups argue that the broader issue is whether dissent is being criminalised under the guise of investigation. The case has therefore reignited national debate over the limits of state authority, the protection of civil liberties, and the shrinking civic space for activists and critics in Nigeria. As the court prepares to reconvene on January 13, observers are closely watching whether the judiciary will reinforce constitutional rights or endorse what many fear is a dangerous precedent—one in which social media criticism can lead to detention. The outcome of Salim Abubakar’s case could become a defining moment for digital freedom, youth activism, and the future of dissent in Nigeria’s democracy.

Police Detain Osun Activists Over Report of Deadly Stampede at APC Aspirant Bola Oyebamiji’s Residence The Nigerian Police have detained civic activists in Osun State following their reports of an alleged stampede that reportedly claimed three lives during a food distribution event at the Ikire residence of All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship aspirant, Bola Oyebamiji. The arrests have sparked widespread concern over freedom of expression, civic reporting, and due process. According to family sources, Mr. Abiodun Adegoke, National Coordinator of the Concerned Citizens of Nigeria (CCN), was arrested in Osogbo after publishing claims about a December 27, 2025 incident in which a stampede allegedly occurred during the distribution of rice and cash gifts. He had reportedly called on security agencies to investigate the incident and maintained that he possessed verifiable information and community accounts. Instead of being invited for questioning, he was allegedly arrested without prior engagement, denied bail, and faced possible transfer to Abuja without a court order. In a separate statement, the CCN condemned the arrest of another member, Mr. Iyiola Monsuru, describing it as an attack on freedom of expression and civic responsibility. The group said the stampede reportedly happened in the early hours of the morning during the distribution of food items and envelopes allegedly containing ₦2,000, leading to the deaths of a woman, Mrs. Buli Balogun (popularly known as Iya Eleelo), and two other persons. The organisation emphasized that incidents involving loss of life should be thoroughly investigated rather than suppressed, warning that arresting citizens for reporting such matters undermines democratic accountability. CCN demanded the immediate and unconditional release of its members and urged security agencies to conduct a transparent, impartial investigation into the alleged deaths. SaharaReporters learned that the arrests followed a social media post titled “Three Feared Dead At Bola Oyebamiji’s Residence In Ikire,” in which Adegoke called for an official probe and appealed to Osun residents to demand a full account of the circumstances surrounding the incident. The development has intensified national debate around police conduct, political pressure, human rights, and the shrinking space for civic engagement in Nigeria, particularly as the 2026 Osun State governorship election approaches.

Iranian women light cigarettes with burning photo of their country’s supreme leader Iranian women have launched a striking new form of protest, lighting cigarettes with burning images of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a bold act of defiance that has spread rapidly online. Videos and photographs of the protests have been shared thousands of times across social media platforms, showing women without headscarves smoking cigarettes ignited by portraits of the country’s most powerful figure. Burning images of the supreme leader is a serious criminal offence under Iranian law, while women smoking in public has long been restricted or discouraged. By combining both acts, and openly defying mandatory hijab laws,protesters are challenging not only Iran’s political authority but also its rigid social controls. Observers say the symbolism of the act makes it particularly difficult for authorities to suppress. “This kind of protest doesn’t rely on mass gatherings that can be dispersed,” one analyst noted. “It spreads digitally and privately, making enforcement far more complex.” The trend has emerged amid deepening economic hardship and renewed nationwide unrest. Iran has been gripped by protests over inflation, unemployment and the collapse of the rial, with demonstrations breaking out in cities across the country. While the current unrest has not yet reached the scale of the mass protests seen three years ago, human rights groups say dozens of people have been killed during clashes with security forces in recent weeks. Authorities imposed a nationwide internet and phone blackout on Thursday night as protests intensified, largely cutting Iran off from the outside world. The blackout followed days of growing demonstrations and reports of escalating violence. Ayatollah Khamenei has accused protesters of acting on behalf of foreign powers, particularly the United States and President Donald Trump. He said demonstrators were attacking public property and warned that Iran would not tolerate what he described as “mercenaries for foreigners.”

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.

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.

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.

Why Did Nigeria Intervene in Benin Republic? How Diplomatic Pressure Secured the Release of Pastor Benjamin Egbaji Jailed for Alleged Rape After Two Years in Detention Why did the Nigerian government step in to secure the release of a pastor imprisoned abroad, and what role did diplomacy and humanitarian concerns play in his freedom? The Federal Government of Nigeria has confirmed the release of Pastor Benjamin Egbaji, a Nigerian cleric and businessman from Cross River State who had been detained in the Republic of Benin for more than two years over alleged rape. His freedom, announced on January 8, 2026, followed a presidential pardon granted by Benin’s President, Patrice Talon, after sustained diplomatic intervention by Nigerian authorities. According to the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, Egbaji was released after what officials described as prolonged detention under “dehumanising conditions.” The amnesty that secured his freedom was formally gazetted on December 17, 2025, and took effect following high-level engagements between both governments. Official statements revealed that Egbaji had initially been held in a hospital in Cotonou before being transferred to prison as his health deteriorated. His case attracted widespread attention after a photograph showing him chained to a hospital bed circulated on social media, sparking public outrage and urgent calls for intervention. Odumegwu-Ojukwu disclosed that her office maintained consistent diplomatic pressure, including a personal visit to the detained pastor while he was hospitalised in August 2025. She described the release as the outcome of “determined diplomatic action,” adding that Nigeria’s foreign policy places the welfare of its citizens abroad at the centre of international engagement. “This release is the result of consistent and determined diplomatic action. We were deeply concerned by his condition and the circumstances of his detention,” the minister said, noting that although Egbaji is in high spirits, he requires extensive medical care after his prolonged incarceration. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs had earlier appealed to Beninese authorities to free the pastor on humanitarian grounds or allow him to serve any remaining sentence in Nigeria. The request followed a joint visit by Odumegwu-Ojukwu and Benin’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Olushegun Adjadi Bakari, during which Nigeria emphasized both Egbaji’s failing health and the long-standing diplomatic ties between the two countries. In official correspondence, Nigerian authorities cited the humanitarian imperative, stating that the cleric’s health had “deteriorated severely while in detention.” Ultimately, the Beninese government granted a presidential pardon, bringing an end to his imprisonment. The development raises critical questions: Was Egbaji’s release driven purely by humanitarian concerns? How much influence did diplomatic relations between Nigeria and Benin Republic play? And what does this case reveal about the treatment of foreign detainees and the protection of citizens abroad? While the allegations that led to his imprisonment remain a sensitive issue, the Nigerian government has framed the intervention as a matter of human rights, medical necessity, and diplomatic responsibility. The case has since become a reference point in discussions on how far governments should go to protect nationals facing detention overseas.

Delta Police Accused of Extortion and Harassment After SaharaReporters Exposé on New Year’s Eve Arrests The Delta State Police Command is under scrutiny for alleged harassment, intimidation, and extortion following a SaharaReporters report exposing arbitrary arrests on New Year’s Eve in Asaba. Sources revealed that police operatives arrested over 40 individuals, including churchgoers attending crossover night services, allegedly demanding ₦150,000 to ₦200,000 for bail. The situation escalated when police reportedly rearrested a worshipper, Benjamin Eboka, after he was initially released, accusing him of leaking information to the media. Eyewitnesses described assaults, tear gas deployment, and wrongful detentions, highlighting claims of deep-rooted corruption within the Delta State Police. The arrests were reportedly orchestrated by DCP Adejobi Olumuyiwa, Deputy Commissioner of Police in charge of Operations, with many victims alleging extortion and abuse of power. Affected individuals include members of the Federal Road Safety Corps, traditional rulers, and innocent worshippers, raising concerns about human rights violations. SaharaReporters’ investigation paints a picture of a pattern of abuse, where officers allegedly label innocent citizens as hoodlums while extorting them and denying due process. Legal experts and victims have called for urgent government intervention and accountability measures within the police command. This story underscores ongoing issues of police misconduct in Nigeria, highlighting the need for transparent policing, protection of citizens’ rights, and institutional reforms to prevent arbitrary detentions and extortion.

Why Was a Woman’s Home Burnt for Worshipping Osun in Kwara, Why Were Suspects Freed, and Has Religious Extremism Now Replaced Justice in Ilorin? A disturbing case of alleged religious persecution has emerged from Ilorin, Kwara State, where a traditional worshipper, Mrs. T.A. Olorisha, says her home was deliberately set ablaze because of her faith, while suspects arrested over the incident were later released by the police. The traumatised woman has now issued a desperate plea for help, warning that she may take her own life if justice is not served. According to Olorisha, she had lived peacefully for years in the Isalẹ Koko area of Ilorin until community members allegedly targeted her over her devotion to Osun, a deity in Yoruba traditional religion. In an emotional video, she recounted how she was summoned to a meeting weeks before the incident, where nine men reportedly told her that an Islamic cleric (“Alfa”) had declared that traditional worshippers were no longer welcome in the community. She said she challenged the claim and demanded to meet the cleric face-to-face, insisting she had done nothing wrong. Instead, the men allegedly threatened her, warning that she should either comply or face consequences. Olorisha recalled that one man openly asked what would happen if her house was burnt, while a police officer present advised restraint and later warned the men against causing trouble. However, while Olorisha travelled to her hometown to attend a traditional festival, her house was allegedly set on fire on January 1, 2026. The blaze destroyed all her belongings, including livestock, leaving her homeless and destitute. She says she has since been moving around in a single piece of clothing, struggling to survive. Her anguish deepened when she learned that suspects initially arrested over the arson had been released, raising fears of intimidation and impunity. In a tearful appeal, she called on Nigerians—especially traditional worshippers—to intervene on her behalf, saying she has nowhere else to turn. She warned that continued abandonment and injustice could push her to suicide. SaharaReporters previously reported that three men were arrested in connection with the attack, and the Kwara State Police Command acknowledged awareness of the case. Yet the alleged release of suspects has intensified public concern about whether law enforcement is willing—or able—to confront religious extremism. The incident has drawn strong condemnation from Omoyele Sowore, human rights activist and publisher of SaharaReporters, who described the attack as part of a broader pattern of religious intolerance in Ilorin. He warned that extremists must be stopped immediately and reminded authorities that no individual or group has the right to impose religious beliefs on others. Sowore referenced a similar 2023 case involving traditional religion activist Tani Olohun, arguing that repeated failures to enforce the law embolden mobs and radical elements. This case has now become a national test of Nigeria’s commitment to religious freedom, constitutional rights, and the rule of law. Why was a woman’s home allegedly destroyed for her beliefs? Why were suspects reportedly freed? And how long will religious intolerance be allowed to override justice in a democratic society? For many Nigerians, Olorisha’s plea is not just about one victim—it is about whether the state can still protect citizens from persecution based on faith, or whether silence and inaction will continue to empower extremism.

Amnesty International Condemns Arbitrary Arrest of Activist Abubakar Musa by Nigerian Police in Abuja Amnesty International has strongly condemned the arrest of Nigerian activist Abubakar Salim Musa by the police in Abuja, describing it as a clear abuse of power and a violation of the right to freedom of expression. Musa, a young social media user, was reportedly tracked and monitored by officers attached to the Gusau Central Police Command, with no formal invitation, complaint, or allegation communicated to him prior to his detention. According to reports, Musa was abducted by heavily armed security personnel at Sounders Suites in Apo Legislative Quarters, Zone E, and detained at the notorious ‘Abattoir’ police detention center, where past detainees have allegedly faced torture. His family and lawyers were initially denied information about his whereabouts, raising concerns about arbitrary detention practices. Amnesty International emphasized that Musa’s arrest is unlawful, noting that criticism of government officials is a protected right under international law. The human rights body called for his immediate and unconditional release, stating: > “No one should be punished for criticizing a government official. Abubakar Salim did not commit any crime and his arrest shows clear abuse of power.” The organization also highlighted a troubling trend in Nigeria, where young people face harassment, threats, and detention for expressing opinions online. Amnesty warned that such actions undermine the rule of law and violate international human rights standards, stressing that social media criticism alone cannot justify police detention. This case raises broader concerns about freedom of expression in Nigeria and the increasing risks faced by activists and young citizens who hold government officials accountable online. Amnesty International called on Nigerian authorities to respect the rights of individuals to dissent, urging legal reforms and protective measures for those exercising their fundamental freedoms.

Trump Orders U.S. Withdrawal From 66 International Organizations, Including 31 UN Bodies U.S. President Donald J. Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the United States to withdraw from 66 international organizations, including 31 United Nations bodies and 35 non-UN entities. The decision, part of Trump’s “America First” foreign policy, follows a review mandated under Executive Order 14199 on February 4, 2025, which tasked the Secretary of State with evaluating U.S. participation in all international intergovernmental organizations, conventions, and treaties receiving American support. According to the memorandum, the Secretary of State submitted findings, which were reviewed by the president and Cabinet, leading to the determination that continued membership in these organizations no longer aligns with U.S. interests. The memorandum instructs all executive departments and agencies to take “immediate steps” to implement withdrawals where legally permissible, including ceasing participation or funding for affected UN bodies. The withdrawal list encompasses a wide array of policy areas, from climate change, energy, and environmental conservation to human rights, peacebuilding, democracy promotion, and cybersecurity. Notable non-UN organizations affected include the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, International Renewable Energy Agency, International Union for Conservation of Nature, and the Global Counterterrorism Forum. UN entities affected include major offices and programs such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, UN Women, UN Population Fund, UN Conference on Trade and Development, UN Peacebuilding Fund, UN Oceans, and the UN University system. Trump emphasized that the review is ongoing, and additional organizations or agreements may be targeted in the future. The memorandum clarifies that this directive does not override existing legal authorities or budgetary controls and does not create enforceable legal rights for any party. The announcement marks one of the largest U.S. withdrawals from international institutions in modern history, reflecting a strategic pivot toward national sovereignty, cost reduction, and reevaluation of multilateral commitments. The State Department will oversee implementation and provide additional guidance to federal agencies.

Are Nigeria’s New Tax Laws Unconstitutional? Why a Lawyer Is Suing the Federal Government Over Multiple Budgets, Fiscal Transparency, and the 2026 Tax Reforms Is Nigeria running its finances in violation of its own laws—and could the country’s new tax regime be declared unconstitutional? These are the questions now before the Federal High Court in Lagos following a landmark lawsuit filed by human rights lawyer, Mr. Tilewa Oyefeso. Oyefeso has dragged the Federal Government, the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the National Assembly, and the Attorney-General of the Federation to court, challenging what he describes as Nigeria’s “opaque and undisciplined fiscal regime.” At the heart of the case is the government’s practice of operating multiple federal budgets simultaneously and introducing new tax laws that he claims contradict both the Constitution and the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) 2007. According to the suit, the Federal Government has extended capital components of the 2024 Appropriation Act into 2025 and 2026 while the 2025 budget is already in force—effectively running overlapping budgets. Oyefeso is asking the court to determine whether this practice complies with Nigeria’s Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the unified annual budgeting system mandated by fiscal law. Why does this matter? The lawyer argues that overlapping budgets, supplementary appropriations, and extended capital projects undermine fiscal transparency, distort expenditure projections, and weaken the macroeconomic discipline the Fiscal Responsibility Act was designed to protect. He also accuses the government of failing to publish quarterly budget implementation reports within the legally required 30-day period—an omission he says makes it impossible for citizens to track public spending or hold authorities accountable. But the lawsuit goes beyond budgets. Oyefeso is also challenging four major tax laws scheduled to take effect from January 1, 2026: the Nigeria Tax Act 2025, the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act 2025, the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act 2025, and the Nigeria Tax Administration Act 2025. He contends that the new tax framework prioritises aggressive revenue generation without first ensuring compliance with constitutional limits on borrowing, deficit thresholds, fiscal accountability, and transparency. Citing Section 16 of the 1999 Constitution, which outlines Nigeria’s economic objectives, Oyefeso argues that fiscal and tax policies must promote social justice, equitable wealth distribution, macroeconomic stability, and the welfare of citizens—not merely expand government revenue. One of his key claims is that the reforms ignore the Fiscal Responsibility Act’s requirement that fiscal deficits should not exceed three per cent of GDP unless expressly approved by the National Assembly. By allegedly sidestepping these safeguards, he says, the new tax laws form part of a broader unconstitutional fiscal structure. Among the reliefs sought, Oyefeso is asking the court to declare the four tax laws unconstitutional, null, and void. He also wants an order of mandamus compelling the National Assembly to amend the Fiscal Responsibility Act to strengthen transparency, fiscal discipline, and prudent resource management. In addition, he seeks a perpetual injunction to halt the implementation of the new tax laws pending such amendments. What could this mean for Nigeria’s economy and governance? If the court upholds his arguments, the ruling could upend Nigeria’s 2026 tax framework, force reforms to budgetary practices, and redefine how fiscal responsibility is enforced under the Constitution. For now, the defendants have 30 days to respond, and the case is yet to be assigned to a judge. But the questions raised are already resonating nationwide: Is Nigeria violating its own fiscal laws? Are the new tax reforms legally sound? And will the courts finally impose transparency on how public funds are budgeted, spent, and taxed?

Was Justice Denied? Why Is Inspector Oboh Still Detained After Being Cleared of Murder Charges in Rivers State? | Fintter Was justice truly served in the case of Inspector Hycenth Oboh—or is this another troubling example of power, politics, and abuse within Nigeria’s law enforcement system? In a case that is raising serious constitutional and human rights concerns, Inspector Hycenth Oboh, a serving police officer attached to the Rivers State Commissioner for Energy and Natural Resources, has allegedly been illegally detained for over 18 months without trial, court order, or lawful disciplinary sanction. His prolonged detention follows a tragic shooting incident that occurred on June 18, 2024, at the Eberi-Omuma Local Government Council Secretariat, where two people were killed during a crossfire. What makes this case particularly controversial is that Inspector Oboh was reportedly discharged and acquitted during an internal police disciplinary process in August 2024. Despite this, he has remained in custody at the State Criminal Investigation Department (SCID) in Port Harcourt—raising urgent questions about the rule of law, police accountability, and respect for constitutional rights in Nigeria. According to sources, Oboh was initially arrested alongside 11 other officers and subjected to investigations by the Homicide Department. They were later tried under the Police Act and Regulations on three counts: discreditable conduct, unlawful exercise of authority, and destruction of government property through the alleged waste of ammunition. All officers pleaded not guilty. Oboh, in particular, denied firing any weapon and reportedly presented medical evidence showing exposure to teargas. The internal proceedings reportedly ended with eight officers, including Oboh, being cleared of all charges. However, in a twist that has left many observers baffled, the Rivers State Police Command allegedly ordered a second disciplinary trial without presenting new evidence. While six officers were later dismissed and five released, Inspector Oboh alone was kept in detention, with no official explanation, court arraignment, or detention order. Even more disturbing are allegations of political interference. Sources claim that a serving federal lawmaker, Hon. Kelechi Nwogu, who represents Etche/Omuma Federal Constituency, may have influenced senior police officials to ensure Oboh remains detained—allegedly to prevent him from testifying or being fully investigated. Although these claims have not been independently verified and the lawmaker has yet to respond, they deepen public concern about whether the case is being driven by justice or by political interests. Beyond the legal questions, the human cost is devastating. Reports indicate that Oboh’s prolonged detention has destroyed his family life, with his wife reportedly leaving with their children due to lack of support. Paradoxically, despite being held over a murder investigation, he is said to have continued receiving his salary, further highlighting contradictions in how the case is being handled. Human rights advocates argue that this situation represents a clear violation of constitutional rights, particularly the rights to liberty and fair hearing. As one advocate put it: “You cannot acquit a man, detain him endlessly, and still call it justice. This is a dangerous abuse of power.” As of now, there is no known court order, no formal charge, and no legal justification for Inspector Oboh’s continued detention. Calls are growing louder for either his immediate release or for authorities to arraign him before a competent court if credible evidence exists. 💬 What Do You Think? (Comment Hooks for Fintter) If an officer is cleared internally, can the police legally keep him locked up without a court order? Is this a case of justice delayed, or justice deliberately denied? Could political influence be overriding due process in this matter? Should Nigeria reform how police disciplinary actions and criminal prosecutions are handled? 👉 Join the conversation on Fintter: Is Inspector Oboh a victim of systemic abuse—or are there facts the public still doesn’t know?