Why Nigeria govment wan end visa-on-arrival policy- how and wetin be di alternative
Na di Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo tok dis one for di Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) capacity-building training wey dem title "Application Of Advance Passenger Information And Passenger Name Records Data In National Security And Law Enforcement".
Na former President Muhammadu Buhari administration bin start di visa-on-arrival policy for 2020 to be short-stay visa wey dem dey give for point of entry.
Tunji-Ojo say federal goment go start landing and exit cards wey visitors fit fill bifor dem enta di kontri to replace visa on arrival policy.
Why dem dey do am?
Di minister of Interior for im remarks torchlight say e dey necessary to bring di immigration data centre togeda.
E explain say dat kain collabo go make am impossible to give clearance to just anybodi to enta di kontri witout say dem get clearance wit Interpol, di criminal records system, and all di background checking agencies at once.
E torchight say security na di koko reason behind di decision to run di cancellation of visa-on-arrival.
"We understand say visa-on-arrival no be system wey dey work bicos I no fit expect say you go just enta my kontri witout say I know say you dey enta my kontri."
"No wia dey wey dem dey do dat kain tin," interior minister tok.
How di visa on arrival policy dey work for Nigeria.
According to di Nigerian Immigration service, pipo wey fit collect visa on arrival to enta Nigeria na pipo wey dey come into di kontri on business purpose except ECOWAS citizens wey no need visa to enta di kontri and oda kontris wey Nigeria get visa abolition agreements wit.
Dem say dia eligibility include
Wetin go change?
Wetin go change now be say di pipo go enta di kontri wit pre filled landing card wey according to Oga Tunji-Ojo na to handle national security.
Di landing and exit card wey Nigeria govment dey introduce go help dem clear any visitors we dey come into di kontri bifor e arrive.
Interior minister sa di visa-on-arrival na manual, but di new system go use technology and not manual.
Meanwhile, oda kontris don run dis kain levels but in different ways.
For Kenya, dem announce in January say dem dey change dia visa on arrival process wia ova 40 kontris dem dia citizens fit get stamp for dia passport wen dem land witout say dem pay shi-shi.
Di new move na to allow citizens from almost all African kontris to enta witout say dem need prior authorization.
Bifor den dem bin dey run wetin dem call Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) wey go replace visa requirements for all visitors.
Di process na say pipo must to apply and pay $30 three days bifor dem enta di kontri for security reasons.
Who go dey affected?
Although e neva clear how di move from visa on arrival to landing and exit cards go affect businesses and business pipo wey dey enta di kontri, e fit affect Nigeria position for di Africa Visa Openness Index (AVOI).
AVOI wey start for 2016, na index from di African Development Bank Group wey dey measure di level wey African kontris dey open to visitors from oda kontris through di visa requirements.
For di 2024 report, Nigeria bin rank number 6th in di continent wit visa openness. Dis na as Ghana, Rwanda, The Gambia, Seychelles and Benin beat di kontri.
Di kontri wey get di worst rating for visa openness for di continent na Sudan.
Di federal govment neva tok di process wey di landing and exit card go take and how visitor go access am.
E neva also clear if govment officials and Ecowas member states go dey affected for dis new policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump's military takeover of Washington DC is a sheer demonstration of power
President Trump imposed a military takeover of the nation's capital on Monday, sending National Guard troops to Washington. He also seized control of the DC municipal police department, invoking an obscure section of the 1973 D.C. Home Rule Act which allows the president to take control of local law enforcement in the district for a period of one month in times of emergency. That there is no emergency is irrelevant: Trump has declared one in order to exercise powers that are only available to him in a state of exception, which is, of course, what the whole country increasingly finds itself to be experiencing as the president expands the powers of his office from those of a constitutional executive into something more like the power of authoritarian control. The move follows the Trump administration's deployment of both the National Guard and the Marines to Los Angeles earlier this year; in a press conference announcing the move on Monday, Trump suggested that he also intends to deploy the military to cities such as Baltimore, Oakland and New York. 'This will go further,' he said. 'We're starting very strongly with DC' The deployment reflects Trump's continued determination to further erode the longstanding American taboo against deploying military personnel for domestic law enforcement. It hardly matters what the pretext for such moves are. In LA, Trump claimed that protests against his administration's kidnapping of immigrants was causing unsustainable disorder in the city; it wasn't. In DC, Trump is likewise claiming that crime is out of control; it is not. (Crime has in fact dropped precipitously in Washington over the past decade, with violent crimes declining by more than half since 2013; there has been an especially steep decline in the crime rate since 2023.) In a bit of dark comedy, attorney general Pam Bondi appeared at the press conference and stood at a podium to declare that crime in DC would soon come to an end, all while flanked by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and President Trump, two men accused – and, in Trump's case, convicted – of numerous crimes themselves. But no one is really supposed to believe that the deployment of troops to America's most liberal, most racially diverse, and most culturally thriving cities is an actual response to an actual crisis. Rather, the thinness of the pretext is itself a demonstration of power. The Trump administration, and national Republicans more broadly, have increasingly been willing to argue that Democratic rule is illegitimate even where Democratic politicians are duly elected; the nationalization of law enforcement in DC follows from this premise, seizing authority that rightly belongs to the Democratic local officials and distributing it to the Republican national figures who will brook no disagreement and tolerate no imposition of policies with which they disagree. Such a move may not, in the end, lead to widespread violence: aside from the lack of much actual crime for them to respond to, the capital is unbearably hot in the summertime, and one imagines sleepy-looking National Guard troops wandering aimlessly around the National Mall in the August swamp heat, wilted and sweaty in their tactical gear. But the imposition should, in a country with sufficient civic virtue, spawn mass protests all the same. The troops, after all, are not there to solve a real problem; there is no actual crisis for Trump to exploit. They are there, instead, because the president wants to send a message: that cities and states that are not sufficiently deferential to him in law will have his will imposed on them by force. The result is the same politics of shakedown and threat that Trump has wielded so successfully against universities and major businesses: he will impose suffering on anyone who does not defer to his will. One strange facet of the Trump era is the continually receding horizon of terms like 'dictatorship' and 'authoritarianism.' Is it an 'authoritarian' move for Trump to seize control of the DC police force if a statute technically grants him the legal authority to do so? Is it a 'dictatorship' if the mechanisms used to extend presidential control into things like private university admissions policies partakes of the nominal consent of administrators? Is it really a collapsed democracy if the soldiers marching down the streets of the capitol haven't actually wound up shooting anyone yet? These are the kinds of questions that sound ridiculous and naïve when you say them out loud; they sound like the kind of excuse-making one engages in when the effort to maintain denial has become desperate. They are also, often, debates involving the sort of semantic questions that are a bad sign when they come up at all: if the answer was good, no one would be asking the question. But the militarization of DC also illustrates a core feature of fascist regimes, which is their collapse of rhetoric and reality. Symbolism, language, images: these are core to Trump's political project, which is as much mythic as it is material. Trump's claims about crime and disorder are plain lies. But the ability to make your lies have the force of fact is a terrifying power. No one can doubt that Trump has seized it. Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist
BreakingNews.ie
2 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Washington finds itself at centre of Trump maelstrom as National Guard arrive
Some of the 800 National Guard members deployed by US president Donald Trump began arriving in the nation's capital on Tuesday. It comes after the White House ordered federal forces to take over the city's police department and reduce crime in what the president called — without substantiation — a lawless city. Advertisement The influx came the morning after Mr Trump announced he would be activating the guard members and taking over the department. The US president's bid to take over public safety in Washington reflects an escalation of his aggressive approach to law enforcement (Alex Brandon/AP) He cited a crime emergency — but referred to the same crime that city officials stress is already falling noticeably. The president holds the legal right to make such moves, up to a point. It remains unclear as the week unfolds how visible and aggressive the federal presence in Washington will be, how it could play out, who would be targeted, and how long it might last. Advertisement On Monday, Washington mayor Muriel Bowser said Mr Trump's freshly announced plan to take over the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and call in the National Guard was not a productive step. It is unclear how visible and aggressive the federal presence in Washington could be (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP) She laid out the city's case that crime has been dropping steadily and said Mr Trump's perceived state of emergency simply does not match the numbers. She also flatly stated that the capital city's hands are tied and that her administration has little choice but to comply. 'We could contest that,' she said of Mr Trump's definition of a crime emergency, 'but his authority is pretty broad'. Advertisement Ms Bowser made a reference to Mr Trump's 'so-called emergency' and concluded: 'I'm going to work every day to make sure it's not a complete disaster.' While Mr Trump invokes his plan by saying that 'we're going to take our capital back', Ms Bowser and the MPD maintain that violent crime overall in Washington has decreased to a 30-year low after a sharp rise in 2023. Carjackings, for example, dropped about 50% in 2024 and are down again this year. Washington mayor Muriel Bowser said crime in the city had been dropping steadily (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP) Ms Bowser, a Democrat, spent much of Mr Trump's first term in office openly sparring with the Republican president. She fended off his initial plans for a military parade through the streets and stood in public opposition when he called in a multi-agency flood of federal law enforcement to confront anti-police brutality protesters in summer 2020. Advertisement She later had the words 'Black Lives Matter' painted in giant yellow letters on the street about a block from the White House. In Mr Trump's second term, backed by Republican control of both houses of Congress, Ms Bowser has walked a public tightrope for months, emphasising common ground with the Trump administration on issues such as the successful effort to bring the NFL's Washington Commanders back to the District of Columbia. She watched with open concern for the city streets as Mr Trump finally got his military parade this summer. Her decision to dismantle Black Lives Matter Plaza earlier this year served as a neat metaphor for just how much the power dynamics between the two executives has evolved. Advertisement Now that fraught relationship enters uncharted territory as Mr Trump has followed through on months of what many DC officials had quietly hoped were empty threats. The new standoff has cast Ms Bowser in a sympathetic light, even among her long-time critics. 'It's a power play and we're an easy target,' Clinique Chapman, chief executive of the DC Justice Lab, said. A frequent critic of Ms Bowser, whom she accuses of 'over policing our youth' with the recent expansions of Washington's youth curfew, Ms Chapman said Mr Trump's latest move 'is not about creating a safer DC. It's just about power'. Ms Bowser contends that all the power resides with Mr Trump and that her administration can do little other than comply and make the best of it. Protesters demonstrate against Mr Trump's planned use of federal law enforcement and National Guard troops in Washington (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP) For Mr Trump, the effort to take over public safety in Washington reflects an escalation of his aggressive approach to law enforcement. The District of Columbia's status as a congressionally established federal district gives him a unique opportunity to push his tough-on-crime agenda, though he has not proposed solutions to the root causes of homelessness or crime. 'Let me be crystal clear,' attorney general Pam Bondi said during Mr Trump's announcement news conference. 'Crime in DC is ending and ending today.' Mr Trump's declaration of a state of emergency fits the general pattern of his second term in office: He has declared states of emergency on issues ranging from border protection to economic tariffs, enabling him to essentially rule via executive order. In many cases, he has moved forward while the courts sorted them out.
Reuters
10 hours ago
- Reuters
China urges local firms not to use Nvidia's H20 chips, Bloomberg News reports
Aug 12 (Reuters) - Chinese authorities have urged local companies to avoid using Nvidia's (NVDA.O), opens new tab H20 processors, particularly for government-related purposes, Bloomberg News reported on Tuesday, citing people familiar with the matter. Authorities have sent notices to a range of firms discouraging use of the less-advanced semiconductors, with the guidance taking a particularly strong stance against the use of Nvidia's H20s for any government or national security-related work by state enterprises or private companies, the report said. Reuters could not immediately confirm the report. Nvidia did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business hours. Nvidia said in July that its products have no "backdoors" that would allow remote access or control after China raised concerns over potential security risks in the chipmaker's H20 artificial intelligence chip. U.S. President Donald Trump suggested on Monday that he might allow Nvidia to sell a scaled-down version of its next-generation advanced GPU chip, Blackwell, in China, despite deep-seated fears in Washington that China could harness U.S. AI capabilities to supercharge its military. The most advanced chip Nvidia is currently allowed to sell to China is the H20, which is based off the company's older Hopper architecture platform. The Trump administration green-lighted exports of H20 AI to China last month. The Trump administration last week also confirmed an unprecedented deal with Nvidia and AMD (AMD.O), opens new tab to give the U.S. government 15% of revenue from sales of some advanced chips in China. China's renewed guidance on avoiding chips also impacts AI accelerators from Advanced Micro Devices, the Bloomberg report said, adding that it was unclear whether any notices from Chinese authorities specifically mentioned AMD's MI308 chip. AMD did not respond to a request for comment outside regular business.
