Headline

Nigeria vs South Africa: The Making of a Big Diplomatic Face-off

Published

6 years ago

September 7, 2019

Eric

…as Xenophobia Tears Africa Apart

By Eric Elezuo

Literarily defined as the fear or hatred of that which is perceived to be foreign of strange, according to Wikipedia, xenophobia is fast threatening to tear the African continent apart, notably Nigeria and South Africa.

In the last few days, uncanny events have occurred to prove that if care is not taken, the highly treasured bi-lateral relationship between Africa’s supposedly two great economic powers, Nigeria and South Africa, will be hitting a brick wall. This is prompted by current ‘sporadic and premeditated’ attacks in the cities of Johannesburg and Jeppestown, leading to massive looting and destruction of business concerns of Africa nationals majority of whom are Nigerians.

Xenophobic attacks among natives of South Africa date back to the 2000s when natives in a bid to ‘clean’ the area of foreigners engaged in violent display of hatred targeting citizens of other countries including Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi among others. The immigrants, mostly those living in the Alexandria township were “physically assaulted over a period of several weeks” in an operation tagged “Buyelekhaya” (go back home). The natives have blamed the foreigners of being the brains behind crimes, unemployment and sexual attacks.

Until, 2015, Nigeria has remained immune to the unprovoked attacks of the South Africans, and then out of the blues, a number of Nigerians were deported on the flimsy excuse of uncertified yellow card. Nigeria promptly retaliated by bundling home some South Africans whose immigration papers were less than accurate. Though the matter was resolved without rancour, the seed of diplomatic suspicion had been sown.

The xenophobic attacks resurrected in April 2015, in Durban and spread to Johannesburg when Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini was quoted as saying that foreigners should “go back to their countries” thereby fueling a crisis.

But the South African government’s reactions to the attacks of September 1 and 3 on businesses belonging to foreigners especially Nigerians have been anything but palatable. It has brazenly defended the attacks, blaming the foreigners for their woes.

In his reaction, South African Small Business Development Minister, Lindiwe Zulu said that foreign business owners cannot expect to co-exist peacefully with local business owners unless they share their trade secrets. Zulu noted that foreign business owners had an advantage over South African business owners due to marginalisation under apartheid. “They cannot barricade themselves in and not share their practices with local business owners,” Zulu said.

The reaction drew a lot of criticisms from some African countries leading to immediate withdrawal of Rwanda, Malawi, Congo DR and others from the just concluded world Economic Forum held in South Africa. Zambia also called off a friendly match with South Africa.

In Nigeria, the Federal government’s summoning of the South African High Commissioner, Mr. Bobby Moore, did not yield any positive fruit, as the envoy seems to echo the stand of the South African government. He maintained that there were no xenophobic attacks ongoing in South Africa. He said that what was going on was attacks masterminded by criminals in which South African businesses have also been affected.

This latest response became irk of the Nigerian public, and there was an immediate reprisal attacks, targeting South African businesses nationwide. In the wake of the reprisal attacks, offices of the telecommunication giants, MTN were torched in some areas just retail shops like Shoprite, Spar and PEP were also massively looted.

Nigeria also withdrew from WEF in South Africa and recalled its ambassador. In the same vein, most Nigerian artist withdrew their participation in major events billed to take place in South Africa while some others vowed never to set foot in South Africa again until a reasonable settlement is achieved.

Ever since, both countries have been talking tough. While South Africa has declared that it will never pay compensation to those who lost their businesses as Nigeria demanded, he Federal government has been advised the annex South Africa businesses in Nigeria including MTN, Stanbic IBTC, Shoprite among others.

The rift is eating deep between the two counties that it seems there is no immediate sign of peace even as President Mohammadu Buhari said he has sent special envoy, whose identity is still shrouded in mystery, to visit President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa to discuss the way forward.

Stakeholders believe that it will take more than diplomatic approach to bring the crisis to a logically settlement. They said that it is not just about the physical attacks on persons and businesses. They argue that that xenophobic attacks have been going on against Nigerians in many areas, saying that South Africa will not think twice to stop Nigerians from entering their soil.

A member, South Africa Specialist Group and CEO, 1860 Travels, Mr. Francis Daodu, told The Boss that South Africa would not blink at the prospect of severing travel relationship as they have in the past make visa procurement for Nigerians a herculean task.

“In the past, it takes only a 10 days for a visa application to be ready, whether positive or negative outcome, but in recent times, one is practically held hostage, passport seized and no communication between the embassy and the applicant. When you get tired of waiting, they hand you over your passport with absolutely nothing done on it. They may not have told anyone that they are not needed in Nigeria, but their body language speaks volume. This is a clear message that Nigerians are no longer wanted in South Africa,” he said.

He hoped however that the South African government, which said it was planning an e-visa procedure before the end of the year will bring it to pass to alleviate the challenges visa applicants face.

In one of the statements of the group, titled Xenophobia, Discrimination and Racism against Nigerians in Visa Procurement by South African Embassy, they averred that:

“The discrimination has become so obvious that it appears that the Embassy is averse to having Nigerians in their homeland as a step forward in the xenophobia being practiced against Nigerians in the country. Recall that violent attacks against Nigerians in South Africa took place in 2008, 2015 and 2017, leaving many killed for no just cause other than hatred.

“This hatred has been reinvented by the Embassy in Nigeria as Nigerians who apply for visas are never given.”

Mr. Daodu believes that much as South Africa continually exhibits xenophobic tendencies against Nigeria, the truth remains they will be the loser in the event of diplomatic blockade. This is because “South African tourism has an active presence in Nigeria, and has been doing a lot of marketing and activation targeted at promoting South Africa as a foremost destination”.

As the two countries battle for diplomatic supremacy, a crisis that has spilled into the streets, it is believed that the volume of trade between both countries currently put at over $60 billion, may be affected. Also, the National Bureau of Statistics First Quarter 2019 Foreign Trade Statistics also revealed that South Africa is one of Nigeria’s top five export destinations as the country exported goods with total value of N325.5 billion or 7.2 percent to South Africa within the period. Consequently, Nigeria stands to lick its wounds should a diplomatic barrier be instituted between both countries.

Unyielding, South Africa maintains that most Nigerians in their country are drug dealers, and are the reasons behind every crime in the country. In other, since they cannot be fished out, all Nigerians, as a matter of urgency should vacate the country.

Lending credence, Nigeria’s Minister of Information, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, had informed that attacking South African business concerns will hurt Nigerians more, taking into consideration that thousands of Nigerians have both direct and indirect connection to all South African businesses operating in Nigeria. He noted that a lot of people will be returned to the labour market.

The crux of the matter remains that neither countries has taken responsibility for the its actions. While South Africa has blatantly refused to offer compensation for the loss Nigerians suffered in Johannesburg and other cities where massive looting and destruction have taken place, Nigeria is seriously considering a legal option. This is even as citizens of Nigeria have caused substantial damage to facilities and businesses not only belonging to South Africans, but to Nigerian citizens. It goes to say the least that perpetrators of the xenophobic act in South Africa and those saddled with reprisal attacks in Nigeria, are all bunch of thugs, if the voice of the South Africa Chief of Police should echoed.

“Otherwise, why will a Nigerian, who is well aware that all the businesses attacked so far have 90 per cent of Nigerian staff. In fact, smaller shops surrounding shoprite were also looted and destroyed; were those ones also South African shops? When we can’t do the right thing, thugs will always hijack it,” a social commentator, who craved anonymity said.

However, while Nigeria has arraigned 85 out of the 125 allegedly arrested during the violent protests, South Africa is yet to take action though it said some arrests have been made.

Presently, the Embassy of South Africa in Nigeria has been shut down just as most of enterprises own and run by South Africa have also closed shops. These include Shoprite, MTN and others. Again, the Federal Government of Nigeria has recalled its ambassador to South Africa, paving the way for more diplomatic brouhaha. It has however, said it would not severe diplomatic relations with South Africa.

The coming days will really be trying as it is yet unknown if Nigeria will keep to its words or will she be cutting diplomatic ties with a country it sacrificed so much to see its liberation.

Headline

Opposition Parties Reject 2026 Electoral Act, Demand Fresh Amendment

Published

13 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Eric

Opposition political parties have rejected the 2026 Electoral Act recently passed by the National Assembly, which President Bola Tinubu swiftly signed into law.

The parties called on the National Assembly to immediately begin a fresh amendment process to remove what they described as “all obnoxious provisions” in the law.

Their position was made known at a press briefing themed “Urgent Call to Save Nigeria’s Democracy,” held at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja on Thursday.

In a communiqué read by the Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) Ahmed Ajuji, the opposition leaders stated:

“We demand that the National Assembly immediately commence a fresh amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, to remove all obnoxious provisions and ensure that the Act reflects only the will and aspiration of Nigerians for free, fair, transparent and credible electoral process in our country. Nothing short of this will be acceptable to Nigerians.”

Some of the opposition leaders present in at the event include former Senate President David Mark; former Governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar; former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; and former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, all from the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The National Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Ahmed Ajuji, and other prominent members of the NNPP, notably Buba Galadima, were also in attendance.

The coalition said the amended law, signed by Bola Tinubu, contains “anti-democratic” clauses, which they argue may weaken electoral transparency and public confidence in the voting system.

At the centre of the opposition’s concerns is the amendment to Section 60(3), which allows presiding officers to rely on manual transmission of election results where there is communication failure.

According to the coalition, the provision weakens the mandatory electronic transmission of results and could create loopholes for manipulation.

They argued that Nigeria’s electoral technology infrastructure is sufficient to support nationwide electronic transmission, citing previous assurances by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The parties also rejected the amendment to Section 84, which restricts political parties to direct primaries and consensus methods for candidate selection.

They described the change as an unconstitutional intrusion into the internal affairs of parties, insisting that indirect primaries remain a legitimate democratic option.

The opposition cited alleged irregularities in the recent Federal Capital Territory local government elections as evidence of what they described as a broader pattern of electoral compromise.

They characterised the polls as a “complete fraud” and said the outcome has deepened their lack of confidence in the ability of the electoral system to deliver credible elections in 2027.

The coalition also condemned reported attacks on leaders of the African Democratic Congress in Edo State, describing the incidents as a serious threat to democratic participation and political tolerance.

They warned that increasing violence against opposition figures could destabilise the political environment if not urgently addressed.

In their joint statement, the opposition parties pledged to pursue “every constitutional means” to challenge the Electoral Act 2026 and safeguard voters’ rights.

“We will not be intimidated,” the leaders said, urging civil society organisations and citizens to support efforts aimed at protecting Nigeria’s democratic system.

On February 18, 2026, President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 into law following its passage by the National Assembly. The Act introduced several reforms, including statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and revised election timelines.

However, opposition figures such as Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi have also called for further amendments, particularly over the manual transmission fallback clause, which critics say leaves room for manipulation.

The president said the law will strengthen democracy and prevent voter disenfranchisement.

Tinubu defended manual collation of results, questioned Nigeria’s readiness for full real-time electronic transmission, and warned against technical glitches and hacking.

The Electoral Act sparked intense debate in the National Assembly over how election results should be transmitted ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Civil society groups under the “Occupy NASS” campaign demanded real-time transmission to curb manipulation.

In the Senate, lawmakers clashed during consideration of Clause 60, which allows manual transmission of results if electronic transmission fails.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (ADC, Abia South) demanded a formal vote to remove the proviso permitting manual transmission, arguing against weakening real-time electronic reporting.

The move led to a heated exchange on the floor, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio initially suggesting the demand had been withdrawn.

After procedural disputes and a brief confrontation among senators, a division was conducted. Fifteen opposition senators voted against retaining the manual transmission proviso, while 55 supported it, allowing the clause to stand.

Earlier proceedings had briefly stalled during clause-by-clause review, prompting consultations and a closed-door session.

In the House of Representatives, a similar disagreement came up over a motion to rescind an earlier decision that mandated compulsory real-time electronic transmission of results to IReV.

Although the “nays” were louder during a voice vote, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas ruled in favour of rescinding the decision, triggering protests and an executive session.

Headline

AFP: How Tinubu’s Govt Paid Boko Haram ‘Huge’ Ransom, Released Two Terrorists for Kidnapped Saint Mary’s Pupils

Published

3 days ago

February 24, 2026

Eric

The Nigerian government paid Boko Haram militants a “huge” ransom of millions of dollars to free up to 230 children and staff the jihadists abducted from a Catholic school in November, an AFP investigation revealed Monday.

Two Boko Haram commanders were also freed as part of the deal, which goes against the country’s own law banning payments to kidnappers. The money was delivered by helicopter to Boko Haram’s Gwoza stronghold in northeastern Borno state on the border with Cameroon, intelligence sources told AFP.

The decision to pay the militants is likely to irritate US President Donald Trump, who ordered air strikes on jihadists in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day and has been sent military trainers to help support Nigerian forces.

Nigerian government officials deny any ransom was paid to the armed gang that snatched close to 300 schoolchildren and staff from St. Mary’s boarding school in Papiri in central Niger state on November 21. At least 50 later managed to escape their captors.

Boko Haram has not been previously linked to the kidnapping, but sources told AFP one of its most feared commanders was behind the mass abduction: the notorious jihadist known as Sadiku.

He infamously held up a train from the capital in 2022 and netted hefty ransoms for the release of government officials and other well-off passengers.

Boko Haram, which has waged a bloody insurgency since 2009, is strongest in northeast Nigeria.

But a cell in central Niger state operates under Sadiku’s leadership. The St. Mary’s pupils and staff were freed after two weeks of negotiations led by Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, with the government insisting no ransom was paid. Nigeria’s State Security Service flatly denied paying any money, saying “government agents don’t pay ransoms”.

However, four intelligence sources familiar with the talks told AFP the government paid a “huge” ransom to get the pupils back. One source put it at 40 million naira per head – around $7 million in total.

Another put the figure lower at two billion naira overall. The money was delivered by chopper to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in the northeast, three sources told AFP.

Due to the lack of communications cover in the remote area, Ngulde had to cross into Cameroon to confirm delivery of the ransom before the first group of 100 children were released.

Nigeria has long been plagued by mass abductions, with criminals and jihadist groups sometimes working together to extort millions from hostages’ families, and authorities seemingly powerless to stop them.

Source: Africanews

Headline

Unlawful Invasion: El-Rufai Drags ICPC, IGP, Others to Court, Demands N1bn Damages

Published

4 days ago

February 23, 2026

Eric

Former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, has slammed a ₦1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for what he claimed was an unlawful invasion of his Abuja residence.

El-Rufai, in a suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, also listed the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja Magisterial District; Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 2nd to 4th respondents respectively.

According to the suit filed through his lawyers, led by Oluwole Iyamu, El-Rufai prayed the court to declare that the search warrant issued on February 4 by the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure at his residence as invalid, null and void.

Security operatives had stormed and searched the former Governor’s residence in the ongoing investigations against him.

However, he argued in the case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, that the search was in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution, and urged the court to declare that the search warrant was “null and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause thereby constituting an unlawful and unreasonable search.”

In the suit dated and filed February 20 by Iyamu, ex-governor, who is currently under detention, sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2pm and executed by agents of ICPC and I-G, “under the aforesaid invalid warrant, amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

“An order directing the Ist and 3rd respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

“An order awarding the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages against the respondents jointly and severally for the violations of the applicant’s fundamental rights, including trespass, unlawful seizure, and the resultant psychological trauma, humiliation, distress, infringement of privacy, and reputational harm.”

The breakdown of the ₦1 billion in damages includes “a N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional distress, and loss of personal security;

“A ₦400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies and vindicate the applicant’s rights.

“A ₦300 million as aggravated damages for the malicious, high-handed and oppressive nature of the respondents’ actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations.”

He equally sought ₦100 million as the cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.

Iyamu argued that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, lacking specificity in the description of items to be seized, containing material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives, and no verifiable probable cause.

He added that the warrant violated Sections 143-148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act, 2000, and constitutional protections against arbitrary intrusions and several other constitutional provisions.

“Section 146 stipulates that the warrant must be in the prescribed form, free from defects that could mislead, but the document is riddled with errors in the address, date, and district designation;

“Section 147 allows direction to specified persons, but the warrant’s indiscriminate addressing to “all officers is overbroad and unaccountable.

“Section 148 permits execution at reasonable times, but the contradictory language creates ambiguity, undermining procedural clarity,” he submitted.

Iyamu stated that the execution of the invalid warrant on Feb. 19 resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s premises, constituting violations of the rights to dignity (Section 34), personal liberty (Section 35), fair hearing (Section 36), and privacy (Section 37) of the Constitution.

He further argued that the search was conducted without legal justification and in a manner that inflicted humiliation and distress.

“Evidence obtained without a valid warrant is unlawful and inadmissible, as established in judicial precedents such as C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137, where the court ruled that evidence procured through improper means contravenes fundamental rights and must be excluded,” he said.

In the affidavit in support of the application, Mohammed Shaba, a Principal Secretary to the former governor, averred that on Feb. 19 at about 2p.m., officers from the ICPC and Nigeria Police Force invaded the residence under a purported search warrant issued on or about Feb. 4.

According to him, the said warrant is invalid due to its lack of specificity, errors, and other defects as outlined in the grounds of this application.

He said the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched for.”

Shaba stated that the officers failed to submit themselves for search as provided by the law before proceeding with the search.

“That the Magistrate did not specify the magisterial district wherein he sits.

“That during the invasion, the officers searched the applicant’s premises without lawful authority, seized personal items including documents and electronic devices, and caused the applicant undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress.

“Now shown to me and marked as ‘EXHIBIT B’ Is the list of the items carted away.

“That no items seized have been returned, and the respondents continue to rely on the unlawful evidence.

“That the applicant suffered violations of his constitutional rights as a result, and this application is brought in good faith to enforce same,” Shaba said.

Source: Naijanews.com