Efforts to oust Rt. Hon Otelemaba Amachree, incumbent speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, have failed, and the counterfeit mace smuggled in by the five anti-Amaechi lawmakers was broken.
Huhuonline.com reported previously that armed thugs sponsored by Hon Evans Babakaya Bipialaka on Tuesday besieged the Assembly chambers with a fake mace and bloodied the majority leader of the House, Chidi Loyd.
Despite the futile effort, the Rivers State Chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has issued a media advisory aimed at further fanning already-scorching political flame in the State.
“The Rivers State Chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has congratulated new Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon Evans Babakaya Bipialaka,” the statement, signed by one Barr Monday Oyenzeowu, said.
The party said that by the unanimous election of the new speaker, the state lawmakers have once again demonstrated the unity and sense of purpose that characterized the hallowed chamber before the crisis. It expressed optimism that the normal House proceedings, which had been stalled for months now due to executive interruption, will now pick up with the new House leadership.
The PDP statement also felicitated with other principal officers of the House elected alongside Rt. Hon Evans Bipialaka and wished them smooth and successful outing. The party called for law and order from all PDP faithful and the people of Rivers State, enjoining all the lawmakers to give their maximum cooperation to the new House leadership.
“It would be recalled that due to the suspension of some recalcitrant members of the State Legislature and the stalling of House proceedings, the lawmakers reconvened this morning, Tuesday July 9, 2013 to take far-reaching decisions, including the impeachment of the former Speaker, Rt. Hon Otelemaba Dan Amachree and his team to bring the legislature back to business,” the statement added.
However, Hon. Lloyd who sustained life threatening injuries is currently hospitalised at an undisclosed hospital in Port-Harcourt.
Speaker Amachree had convened a sitting of the House to allow Deputy Governor Tele Ikuru present amendments to the 2013 Appropriation Bill to the Assembly on behalf of Governor Rotimi Amaechi. After the presentation, the Assembly was enveloped in chaos.
According to Acting Press Secretary to the deputy governor, Godswill Jumbo, the deputy governor was exiting the Assembly when thugs loyal to the anti-Amaechi lawmakers thronged the Assembly complex, chanting solidarity songs in support of Hon. Evans Bipi and going on to damage the deputy governor’s car.
According to the statement, other cars in the deputy governor’s convoy were also badly damaged while some members of Ikuru’s entourage only escapes by foot.
Reacting to the crisis, Senator representing Rivers South-East in the National Assembly, Magnus Abe described the attack on Speaker Amachree and House Leader Lloyd under the watchful eyes of the police as a shame and slap on democracy.
“He has therefore charged lovers of democracy and Nigerians to not only condemn the dastard and barbaric act but resist moves being orchestrated by those under democratic oath to make the state ungovernable,” Boma Pepple, his spokesperson said.
Senator Abe was reacting to the incident in the House of Assembly today where five members on a mission to impeach House officers resulted to physical attacks, injuring the speaker, leader and other members before the House could sit formally.
“The Senate Committee Chairman on Petroleum (Downstream) wondered the kind of democracy we were practising in the country if democratic institutions and those elected to make laws cannot be protected,” the statement added.
Senator Abe maintained that plans to throw the state into anarchy will not succeed and urged well-meaning people of Rivers to stand by Governor Amaechi whom he said was being persecuted for defending the state.
Before Monday’s sitting, 27 of the 32 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly were in support of Governor Chibuike Amaechi while five were at the other end.
Trouble started during exchange of pleasantries, when Michael Chinda and Chidi Lloyd exchanged heated words to the extent that Chinda punched Lloyd. Three of the pro-Amaechi lawmakers who were overpowered in the House left, after which some thugs came into the chambers demanding to see the speaker.
Kelechi Wogu emerged with a mace that was markedly different from the usual one in the Assembly, and Evans Bipi was made Speaker Pro-tempore to superintend over the sitting. Once it began, Hon. Martins Amaehule moved a motion for the impeachment of the speaker for ineptitude. The five members present supported it.
Chinda subsequently nominated Evans Bipi as Speaker. The motion was carried by the five members and they immediately addressed the press. The three lawmakers who left earlier returned with other Amaechi loyalists and the governor himself, who invited soldiers for protection despite that Lloyd had initially written through Clerk of the House to the state’s police commissioner.
In the ensuing free-for-all between legislators on opposite sides, Assembly staff were vacated. Chidi Lloyd was caught on camera hitting Kelechi Wogu with the mace and chasing him through the hallowed chambers. Various properties in the Assembly Complex were vandalised.
The governor left and the 27 lawmakers loyal to him sat while Deputy Governor Ikuru presented an amendment to the state’s 2013 budget, after which the House adjourned indefinitely. By this time, the governor had left the assembly.
Evans Bipi who was elected Speaker by his faction claimed that 15 members voted to impeach the speaker. He claimed that 25 members were present but eyewitnesses said otherwise.
Narrating his account of the incident, Majority leader Lloyd said;
“Well, yesterday Speaker of the House, Rt. Hon. Otelema Dan Amachree directed that the House be reconvened to consider an amendment to the 2013 appropriation law, which the governor had communicated to him via a letter; and as if Mr. Speaker saw what was going to happen today, he wrote a letter through the Clerk of the House to the Commissioner of Police to provide security for today’s sitting and he also wrote to the commander of 2 Amphibious Brigade who doubles as the head of the internal JTF.”
He said that when the lawmakers got to work on Tuesday morning, they were surprised to notice heavy presence of policemen, and erroneously thought it was in response to the speaker’s request.
“Shortly thereafter, I noticed that the five anti-Amaechi members were discussing in clusters and calling on their boys to come in. Initially, the policemen were searching everybody who would come into the premises. I had to even come down at the gate and trek into the premises. So after a while, we learnt that there were phone calls and the commissioner of police personally called the unit, the man in charge to allow everybody in.
“We went in as members who have not seen ourselves for sometime because of the crisis in the state. I was on my seat, without provocation. Hon. Evans Bipi came to me in the full glare of everybody on camera and started raining punches on me. As his leader, I did not react because I felt that it is something we could settle. Whatever it is, maybe I didn’t greet him also. So he continued. The speaker intervened and said, ‘what’s happening?’
“Then he reached out for the tripod that stands the camera, used it freely on me — himself and Michael Okechukwu Chinda. They flogged me to their satisfaction, I didn’t just utter a word until Hon. Ihunwo graciously asked me to run for my dear life because they have brought people with guns and of course when I looked at the gallery they were shouting ‘Who is the Chidi Lloyd? Who is the Chidi Lloyd.’
So at that point, I’m sure somebody may have reached out to the governor of the state who came in with his own security because these other policemen were there standing helplessly, watching what was going on. So he came and rescued members out of the place.
“Then after a while we heard that they had sat, that they were meeting, they were trying to meet; they had procured a fake mace to the House. So we went back and I took the mace where they were sitting, then I sustained injury as a result of the violence by Michael Chinda and Evans Bipi.
“So while I was in the hospital the speaker and other members of the House sat and heard the amendment that the governor sent was presented on his behalf by the deputy governor. Now these amendments are that the governor said he was just seeking for us to enable him take care of certain unforeseen events such as flood and all that. That is why we went to work for the state only to be dealt with in the manner that they have dealt with us. I want to use this opportunity, while in the hospital here; I have received phone calls of threat to my life and to members of my family.
“Incidentally, I’m so helpless. I don’t know who to run to. I can’t go to the commissioner of police because he is already in the arena; he’s already on the other side. I’m appealing to well-meaning Nigerians to pray for me and my family. That is the last hope we have resorted to and that we also urge the National Assembly, the senate president and the speaker of the House of Reps not to turn the other way on the events of Rivers State.
“This could lead to something that we cannot imagine. It had happened in Anambra State, people were laughing. Today, it is Rivers State; nobody knows the next state it would be. If we are practising democracy, let us please for crying out loud play by the rules. Nigerians should pray for me and come to our aid. The state is under siege. You can’t even vouch for the safety of the governor. The people are getting more bashed on a daily basis.”
 |
|
Shettima at UNGA: Africa Demands a Seat at the Global Table
Nigeria has taken its campaign for a bigger African voice in global affairs to the heart of the United Nations, with Vice President Kashim Shettima demanding sweeping reform of the UN Security Council and permanent representation for Africa.
Delivering President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s address at the **81st United Nations General Assembly** in New York on Thursday, Shettima said the international system created after World War II could no longer adequately reflect the realities of the modern world.
Nigeria called for **at least two permanent seats for Africa**, with the full rights and responsibilities of permanent membership, including veto rights for as long as the veto remains part of the Security Council, alongside **five non-permanent African seats**.
The demand puts Africa's long-standing campaign for greater representation at the centre of Nigeria's message to world leaders.
1945 cannot define 2026’
The Nigerian delegation argued that the distribution of power established in 1945 has left Africa under-represented in the institution responsible for some of the world's most consequential decisions on peace and security.
For Abuja, the issue is not simply about seats at the UN. It is about giving African countries a greater role in decisions that directly affect the continent.
Nigeria anchored its position on the **Ezulwini Consensus**, the African Union's common position on Security Council reform.
CONFLICTS: NIGERIA CALLS FOR DIPLOMACY
Shettima's address also turned to the conflicts confronting the international community.
Nigeria called for stronger diplomacy, respect for international law and protection of civilians, while urging greater international efforts to resolve conflicts, including the crisis in Sudan.
The Nigerian position was that lasting peace cannot be secured solely through military action and that diplomacy, dialogue and negotiated settlements remain essential tools for resolving conflicts.
TERRORISM: ‘NO COUNTRY CAN FIGHT ALONE’
With Nigeria continuing to confront terrorism and other forms of transnational crime, the address placed international security cooperation high on the agenda.
Nigeria called for stronger intelligence-sharing, action against terrorist financing and greater cooperation to prevent illicit weapons from crossing borders.
But Abuja also linked security to development, pointing to education, economic opportunity, accountable governance and protection of citizens** as important elements of long-term stability.
AFRICA’S WEALTH: FROM RAW MATERIALS TO INDUSTRIAL POWER
The Nigerian message went beyond politics and security.Tinubu's address, delivered by Shettima, called for Africa to transform its vast natural resources into industrial and economic opportunities by expanding **local processing, manufacturing, technology and value-added production**.
Nigeria also highlighted the African Continental Free Trade Area as an opportunity to expand intra-African trade and build stronger regional supply chains.
The message was clear: Africa's resources should generate greater value, jobs and investment within the continent rather than being exported largely in raw form.
CLIMATE AND DEVELOPMENT
Nigeria also reaffirmed its commitment to climate action, including its 2060 net-zero target, while stressing the need for financing, technology transfer and international support for developing countries.
Abuja argued that climate action and economic development should be pursued together, particularly in countries still struggling to provide reliable energy and economic opportunities for rapidly growing populations.
THE NIGERIAN MESSAGE
From the UN podium in New York, Shettima delivered a message that combined Nigeria's foreign-policy priorities with its wider vision for Africa: **greater representation, stronger security cooperation, economic transformation and a more inclusive international system.**
For Nigeria, the Security Council reform campaign remains a central part of that agenda.
The demand from Abuja is straightforward: **Africa should have a permanent voice in the room when decisions affecting international peace, security and global governance are made. And Nigeria says it intends to keep making that case.
News
CBN Slashes Interest Rate to 23% in Major Policy Adjustment
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has reduced its benchmark interest rate from 26.5 per cent to 23 per cent, marking a significant shift in its monetary policy direction.
CBN Governor, Olayemi Cardoso, announced the decision on Tuesday following the conclusion of the Monetary Policy Committee’s (MPC) 307th meeting in Abuja.
According to Cardoso, the committee reviewed developments in both the global and domestic economies, assessed emerging risks and considered their potential implications for monetary policy before reaching its decision.
“The Committee decided as follows: reset the monetary policy rate at 23 per cent,” the governor said.
The latest move represents a 350-basis-point reduction in the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR). It follows two consecutive MPC meetings at which the rate was left unchanged, after the committee lowered it by 50 basis points in February 2026.
In addition to cutting the MPR, the committee adjusted the standing facility corridor to +50 and -300 basis points around the new benchmark rate.
However, the CBN retained existing Cash Reserve Requirement (CRR) levels at 45 per cent for deposit money banks, 16 per cent for merchant banks and 75 per cent for non-TSA public-sector deposits.
Cardoso explained that the changes were designed to improve the effectiveness of monetary policy by strengthening the transmission of policy decisions through the financial system.
He said the adjustment was also part of efforts to restore the MPR as the primary signal of the CBN’s monetary policy and improve the operation of the monetary policy framework.
According to the governor, the MPC viewed the recalibration as an operational adjustment rather than a fundamental shift in the bank’s monetary policy stance.
“The Committee emphasized that the duration of the corridor does not constitute a change in the current monetary policy stance, but rather an operational reset to enhance the effectiveness of monetary policy and support the transition to an inflation targeting framework,” he said.
The committee also noted ongoing efforts by the CBN to strengthen its monetary policy implementation framework. Cardoso said transaction-based operational benchmarks had improved the transparency of money-market operations.
The MPC consequently concluded that resetting the MPR and adjusting the policy corridor would bring the monetary policy framework more closely in line with prevailing market conditions.
The committee said the changes are expected to improve policy transmission and reinforce the MPR’s role as the central benchmark for monetary policy.
Members further maintained that the latest adjustments should be viewed primarily as an operational realignment of the framework and not, in themselves, as a change in the underlying monetary policy stance.
Business
In The Spotlight
Editorial:Trump @ UNGA: Power Is Not a Substitute for Strategy
President Donald Trump came before the United Nations this week with a message that has defined much of his second presidency: The United States is powerful, it intends to use that power, and it will not permit international institutions to place limits on American sovereignty.
There was little ambiguity in the message. Trump celebrated military strength, demanded greater control over America’s borders, challenged international institutions and portrayed American technological leadership as a strategic necessity. On Iran, Gaza, immigration, the International Criminal Court and artificial intelligence, the president returned repeatedly to the same principle: Nations must defend their own interests, and the United States must remain free to act.
That is a coherent philosophy. But coherence is not the same as effectiveness.
The question raised by this speech is not whether America should be strong. No serious foreign policy can begin from the premise that American power is irrelevant. The question is what that power is for — and whether it is being used in ways that make the United States more secure over the long term.
Trump's remarks on Iran illustrated the dilemma.
He reaffirmed that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon and paired the possibility of diplomacy with warnings of devastating military consequences.
Deterrence has always depended partly on credibility. But credibility is not measured only by the willingness to threaten force. It is also measured by the ability to achieve a political outcome once force has been used.
Wars can begin with clear objectives and end with consequences no government anticipated. The history of American foreign policy offers ample evidence that military superiority does not automatically translate into political control.
That is why diplomacy cannot simply be regarded as the alternative to strength. At its best, diplomacy is one of the instruments through which strength is converted into durable agreements.
The same distinction matters in Trump's approach to the United Nations.
The president has argued that international institutions have become too costly, too bureaucratic and too willing to intrude upon national sovereignty. His administration has pursued reductions in America's financial and institutional commitments to the United Nations.
There is nothing inherently wrong with demanding accountability from an international organization. The United Nations deserves scrutiny. Its bureaucracy can be inefficient, its member states often disagree and its institutions can fail to prevent the very conflicts they were created to address.
But the choice is not simply between an ineffective United Nations and an unconstrained America.
International institutions exist in part because some problems cannot be solved effectively by individual nations acting alone. Nuclear proliferation is one. Global pandemics are another. Artificial intelligence increasingly belongs on that list.
Trump's comments about AI therefore deserve particular attention. He emphasized American technological leadership and warned against international regulation that could restrain innovation.
The United States has obvious reasons to remain at the forefront of AI development. But technological leadership and international coordination are not necessarily opposing objectives. The challenge is to develop rules that protect security without freezing innovation.
That requires American leadership, not American isolation.
The president's immigration argument followed the same pattern. He presented control of the border as an essential expression of national sovereignty and rejected the notion that international norms should prevent governments from determining who may enter their territory.
A sovereign nation plainly has an interest in controlling its borders. But sovereignty also carries responsibilities. The United States, like other countries, must reconcile border enforcement with its legal and humanitarian obligations.
The difficult work of governing begins where slogans end.
That is ultimately what was missing from the most sweeping parts of Trump's speech: not conviction, but attention to the institutional machinery required to turn conviction into lasting results.
America can impose costs on adversaries. It can withdraw from agreements. It can reduce contributions to international organizations. It can threaten overwhelming force. It can use its enormous economic and technological advantages.
But power has a second dimension that is easier to overlook: the ability to persuade allies, maintain coalitions, preserve diplomatic channels and build institutions capable of surviving changes in leadership.
The United States did not become the world's leading power merely because it possessed the world's strongest military. It built alliances. It established institutions. It cultivated economic relationships. It persuaded other countries that American leadership could serve interests beyond America's own.
Trump's speech represents a different emphasis.
It places sovereignty before institutions, pressure before accommodation and national interest before international consensus.
There is a legitimate debate to be had over whether the postwar international system has become too cumbersome, too expensive or insufficiently accountable. But reforming that system and weakening it are not the same thing.
The distinction will matter greatly in the years ahead.
A stronger America is not necessarily an America that stands alone. Nor is international cooperation synonymous with surrendering sovereignty.
The enduring challenge of American foreign policy is to combine power with restraint, independence with alliances and national interest with the recognition that American security is inseparable from the wider world.
Trump's speech made clear which side of that debate he occupies.The more consequential question is what happens next.
History will not ultimately judge the speech by its applause lines, its threats or its declarations of American strength. It will judge the policy that follows — and whether that policy produces a world in which the United States is not merely more powerful, but more secure.
Power matters. But power, by itself, is not a strategy.
In The Spotlight
Who Is in Charge? Tinubu Is in Paris, Shettima Is in New York
By now, Nigerians deserve more than explanations. They deserve clarity. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is in Paris. Vice President Kashim Shettima is in New York.
And Nigeria is in Abuja, Lagos, Kano, Port Harcourt, Maiduguri and everywhere else Nigerians are dealing with the daily business of surviving, working and waiting for government to deliver. So, a simple question is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid:Who is in charge?
Before anyone dismisses that question as opposition politics, let us establish the facts. Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a working vacation. He subsequently moved from London to Paris and, on September 21, the Presidency announced that he had extended his stay by a few days and would return at the weekend.
Shettima left Nigeria on September 20 for New York, where he is representing the President and leading Nigeria's delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly.
The government says there is no vacuum. It says Tinubu remains in contact with officials at home and continues to direct the affairs of government. It also says Shettima has been given the President's mandate to represent Nigeria at the UN.
Fine. But that does not make the question disappear.It makes the question more important.
A country cannot run on “trust us”
Government is not supposed to operate on whispers, assumptions or political reassurance.It operates through institutions.
It operates through constitutional authority. It operates through clearly defined responsibilities. And when the President is abroad for an extended period while the Vice President is also outside the country, Nigerians have every right to ask where executive authority is located and who is exercising it.
This is particularly relevant because Nigeria's Constitution provides a specific mechanism for a President who is proceeding on vacation or otherwise unable to discharge the functions of office.
That mechanism exists for a reason.It is designed to prevent uncertainty.It is designed to prevent a vacuum.It is designed toensure that, at every moment, Nigerians know who is constitutionally responsible for the presidency.
So why should Nigerians have to debate the issue?
The Presidency says everything is fine
The government insists that there is no disruption to governance.The Presidency says Tinubu has remained engaged from abroad. It points to decisions taken by the President while away and says the Vice President's trip to New York is an official assignment.
There is nothing inherently unusual about a Nigerian president travelling abroad.There is nothing unusual about a vice president representing the country at the United Nations.
The problem is the combination.The President is away. The Vice President is away. And the country is being told that everything is perfectly normal.
Perhaps it is.But if it is, then proving it should be easy.Tell Nigerians clearly who is exercising presidential authority.
Tell Nigerians whether the constitutional procedure has been followed.Tell Nigerians who is accountable for presidential decisions while both men are outside the country.This should not be difficult.
Leadership is also about presence
There is a difference between saying government is functioning and demonstrating that leadership is present.Nigeria is not short of challenges.
The cost of living remains a major concern. Security remains a national issue. Unemployment and economic hardship continue to affect households. Nigerians are demanding better public services and greater accountability.
At such a moment, leadership cannot be reduced to whether instructions can be transmitted from one continent to another.
Leadership is also about visibility. It is about being present when the country needs reassurance. It is about being accessible when difficult questions arise. It is about giving citizens confidence that somebody is firmly in control. A president does not have to sit permanently in Aso Rock to govern Nigeria. But Nigerians should never be left wondering whether anyone is sitting firmly at the controls.
Paris is not Abuja
There is another uncomfortable truth.Nigeria's political class has become remarkably comfortable governing from airports, hotel suites, foreign capitals and conference rooms.The rest of the country does not have that luxury.
The Nigerian worker cannot take a working vacation from inflation.The small business owner cannot take annual leave from electricity costs.The parent struggling with school fees cannot postpone the bills until the President returns. The young graduate without a job cannot simply wait for the government to reconnect with reality.
For ordinary Nigerians, the country does not go on vacation.That is why the optics matter.While the President is in Paris and the Vice President is in New York, millions of Nigerians remain at home confronting the consequences of government policy every day.
This is bigger than Tinubu
The danger is that this debate becomes another partisan shouting match. Supporters will say the President is working.
Opponents will say the government has abandoned its responsibilities. Both sides can shout themselves hoarse.
But the Constitution does not work by volume. The question is not whether Tinubu's supporters are satisfied.The question is not whether his opponents are outraged.The question is whether the constitutional chain of executive authority is clear. That is an institutional question, not a party question. And the National Assembly has a role to play in ensuring that Nigerians are not left guessing.
Nigeria deserves an answer
There is something deeply unhealthy about a democracy in which citizens have to ask social media, political parties and television commentators who is exercising presidential power.
The answer should be official.It should be constitutional.It should be unambiguous.If Tinubu is fully exercising the powers of President from Paris, say so.If Shettima is exercising presidential functions under the constitutional provisions governing presidential absence, say so.If there is no constitutional problem, explain precisely why.
But please, stop treating a legitimate question as an attack on the government.A government confident in its constitutional position should welcome clarity.
Who is in charge?
This is ultimately not about Paris.It is not about New York.It is not even primarily about Tinubu or Shettima. It is about the Nigerian presidency. A republic of more than 200 million people should not have an invisible question mark hanging over its executive authority.
Tinubu can travel.Shettima can travel.Government can continue. But constitutional responsibility must remain visible.
Because when both the President and Vice President are outside the country, Nigerians should not have to look at a map to figure out where their government is.
They should be able to look at the Constitution.And the answer should be unmistakable.Who is in charge? Nigeria deserves to know.
By Emmanuel Emeke Asiwe, Publisher/Editor-in-Chief