At least 51 people were killed by gunmen in the early hours of Monday in Nigeria's northern Plateau state, residents and Amnesty International said, two weeks after deadly clashes in another part of the state left dozens dead.

Last week, the national emergency agency said gunmen had killed at least 52 people and displaced nearly 2,000 others over several days of attacks in Plateau, which has a history of violence between farmers and cattle herders.

On Monday, residents said 51 bodies had been recovered in the Zikke and Kimakpa villages in Plateau's Bassa district, while several more were reportedly injured.

The cause of the attack was not immediately known.

"A mass burial is currently underway. There is outrage in the land at the moment," said resident Joseph Chudu Yonkpa, who said the gunmen were cattle herders.

A police spokesperson did not immediately comment.

"No community deserves to go through such trauma, bloodshed, and destruction," said Albert Garba Samuel, spokesperson for local youth group Jere Nation Youths Development Association.

Amnesty International Nigeria said the gunmen also razed and looted homes.

"The inexcusable security lapses that enabled this horrific attack, two weeks after the killing of 52 people, must be investigated," Amnesty said in a statement.

Plateau is one of several ethnically and religiously diverse hinterland states known as Nigeria's Middle Belt, where inter-communal conflict has claimed hundreds of lives in recent years.

The violence is often painted as ethno-religious conflict between Muslim herders and mainly Christian farmers. But climate change and the reduction of grazing land through agricultural expansion are also major factors.

Reuters

Israel makes new Gaza ceasefire proposal but prospects appear slim

Mediators Egypt and Qatar have presented a new Israeli proposal for a Gaza ceasefire to Hamas, Egyptian state-affiliated Al Qahera News TV said on Monday, but a senior Hamas official said at least two elements of the proposal were nonstarters.

Citing sources, Al Qahera said mediators awaited Hamas' response.

Hamas said in a statement later in the day that it was studying the proposal and that it will submit its response "as soon as possible".

The militant group reiterated its core demand that a ceasefire deal must end the war in Gaza and achieve a full Israeli pull-out from the strip.

Earlier, senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters that the proposal did not meet the Palestinian group's demand that Israel commit to a complete halt of hostilities.

In the proposal, Israel also for the first time called for the disarmament of Hamas in the next phase of negotiations, which the group will not agree to, Abu Zuhri said.

"Handing over the resistance's weapons is a million red lines and is not subject to consideration, let alone discussion", Abu Zuhri said.

Israel did not immediately comment on the reported proposal.

The head of the Egyptian state information service told Al Qahera: "Hamas knows very well the value of time now and I believe that its response to the Israeli proposal will be quick."

Israel restarted its offensive in the enclave in March, ending a ceasefire that went into effect in late January.

The latest round of talks on Monday in Cairo to restore the ceasefire and free Israeli hostages ended with no apparent breakthrough, Palestinian and Egyptian sources said.

Hamas insists Israel commit to ending the war and pull out its forces from the Gaza Strip as agreed in the three-phase ceasefire accord that went into effect in late January.

Israel has said it will not end the war unless Hamas is eliminated and returns the remaining hostages held in Gaza.

"Hamas is ready to hand over the hostages in one batch in exchange for the end of war and the withdrawal of Israeli military" from Gaza, Abu Zuhri said.

Since restarting its military offensive last month, Israeli forces have killed more than 1,500 Palestinians, Gaza health authorities have said. It has displaced hundreds of thousands of people and imposed a blockade on all supplies entering the enclave.

Meanwhile, 59 Israeli hostages remain in the hands of the militants. Israel believes 24 of them are alive.

Reuters

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Russian strike on Sumy targeted Ukrainian and NATO officers – Lavrov

Sunday’s missile strike on the northeastern Ukrainian city of Sumy was aimed at senior Ukrainian and Western military personnel, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.

His comments followed a report from the Russian Defense Ministry, which confirmed that two Iskander-M missiles had struck the location, killing at least 60 senior commanders.

“We have facts about who was at the facility that was hit in Sumy. It was another meeting of Ukrainian military leaders with their Western colleagues, who were either masquerading as mercenaries or I don’t know who,” Lavrov told Interfax on Monday.

“There are NATO servicemen there and they are directly in charge,”the top diplomat added. “Everyone knows this,” Lavrov said, referring to last month’s New York Times report detailing US involvement in Ukrainian attacks on Russia since the escalation of the conflict in 2022.

Kiev has routinely flouted international law by placing armaments in or near civilian infrastructure, the minister said.

”International humanitarian law categorically prohibits the deployment of military facilities and weapons on the territory of civilian facilities,” Lavrov stated. Despite this, from the earliest stages of the conflict, “there were ‘a million’ examples of [Kiev’s] deployment of artillery and air defense systems in city blocks near kindergartens,” he added.

“How many videos have been posted on the Internet, when Ukrainian women shout for the military to get away from stores and playgrounds. But this practice continues,” the diplomat said.

According to local authorities in Sumy, the Russian missile strike killed over 20 civilians and wounded more than 80 others.

Reacting to the claim, the Russian Defense Ministry accused Kiev of systematically using its civilian population “as a human shield.”

Several Ukrainian officials have criticized the location chosen for the meeting.

Artyom Semenikhin, mayor of neighboring city of Konotop and a member of the neo-Nazi Svoboda party, blamed the head of the Sumy Region’s military administration for organizing the conference in a civilian area so close to the front line.

Sumy is situated some 25 kilometers (15 miles) from the Russian border and the nearby Kursk Region, an area where heavy fighting is taking place.

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian drone attack on Russia's Kursk kills woman, injures nine, authorities say

A Ukrainian overnight drone attack killed an 85-year-old woman, injured nine people and sparked fires in several buildings in the Russian city of Kursk near the border with Ukraine, regional authorities said on Tuesday.

"Kursk has been subjected to a massive enemy attack overnight," the Kursk region administration said in a post on Telegram messaging app.

A multi-storey apartment building was damaged in result of the drone attack, with several flats catching fire, acting mayor of Kursk, Sergei Kotlyarov said on Telegram. Residents have been evacuated to a nearby school, he added.

Drones also hit also an ambulance garage, damaging 11 cars, the region's administration said.

The scale of the attack was not immediately clear but Russia's Baza and SHOT Telegram channels, which often publish information from sources in the security services and law enforcement, said that more than 20 blasts shook the city.

They posted photos of what looked like a multi-storey residential building on fire at night.

Reuters could not independently verify the reports. There was no immediate comment from Ukraine. Both sides deny targeting civilians in the war, which Russia launched with a full-scale invasion on Ukraine more than three years ago.

Ukrainian troops, which staged a cross-border incursion into the Kursk region of which the city of Kursk is the administrative centre, still remainin parts of it, although Russian forces have recaptured much lost territory.

The attack follows a Russian missile and bomb attack on the Ukrainian city of Sumy over the weekend that killed 35 people and injured at least 119.

RT/Reuters

The last time I wrote about this tragedy, which I now call Tinubu’s Terrible Tribalism, I had asked: Is Tinubu settling scores? Because the president’s naked embrace of Yorubacentricism after a lifetime of railing with his kinsmen against Hausa-Fulani hegemony could only have been inspired by vengeance.

But such undisguised and unbridled vengeance in his first term against the North, whose votes he must secure for re-election, would be foolhardiness. The focus on the North isn’t to understate the treachery other zones feel but to emphasise the political irrationality and moral hypocrisy of Tinubu’s tribalism. Tinubu might be arrogant and occasionally temperamental, but he is a consummate schemer. The idea that he can allow self-indulgence to blind him to basic political calculations is a little preposterous. So why is Tinubu relentlessly perpetuating a Yoruba hegemony so early in his presidency?

It’s doubtful even that the mercurial Sunday Igboho, saddled with the responsibilities of a president, would have relegated statesmanship and national cohesion to this extent in pursuit of an apparent ethnic championship. Igboho, being less cunning and presumptuous might have been more sensitive. The reality is astounding, so it bears repeating. All critical instruments of coercion are effectively in the hands of one ethnic group. A Yoruba is president. A Yoruba is the Chief of Army Staff. Yoruba is the Inspector General of Police. A Yoruba is the Director General of the State Security Service. A Yoruba is the EFCC chairman. A Yoruba is the Chief Justice of the Federation. A Yoruba is the Attorney General of the Federation. A Yoruba is the Comptroller General of Customs. A Yoruba heads Immigration. The Chief Justice is not the president’s appointee but shouldn’t the Yoruba headship of two of the three arms of government make Tinubu worry about imbalance? Even if the Yoruba had conquered Nigeria, wouldn’t they have been more magnanimous?

A few commentators have argued that having come to the throne majorly through self-help and against all odds, Tinubu perhaps feels entitled to do and undo. Expanding his Lagos dynasty and imposing it on the entire country might be, for him, his natural progression. But perhaps that portrays Tinubu too much as a Tarzan. However, Tinubu’s politics, read benignly, conceives good governance to be dependent on a guided continuity. For him, democracy means benign Babasopecracy (patriarchal autocracy). It doesn’t matter if it is forced to masquerade and run around as a liberal multiparty democracy. So what others see as opportunistic self-aggrandising godfatherism aimed at entrenching a private political dynasty using Yoruba as mere building blocks, he possibly sees as progressive politics. While an obsession for an expanded dynasty coheres with Tinubu’s political history and explains in part his carefree tribalism, nothing in this dynasty concept precludes shrewd calculated inclusiveness. Allowing pliable folks from all parts of the country to occupy critical security positions to hoodwink the populace would have provided a necessary smokescreen. But Tinubu has chosen to be explicit.

Nigeria has six zones. Yoruba is primarily one zone. Nigeria has over 250 ethnic groups. Yoruba is only one of them, though it constitutes about 20 per cent of the national population. A Yoruba is the Minister of Finance and Coordinator of the Economy. A Yoruba is the Oil Minister. Another Yoruba is the CBN Governor. A Yoruba is the Minister of Blue Economy. Yet another Yoruba is the Minster of Digital Economy. A Yoruba is the Minister of Solid Minerals. A Yoruba is the Minister of Trade and Industries. A Yoruba is the head of FIRS. A Yoruba is Managing Director of Bank of Agriculture. A Yoruba is Managing Director of Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF). Another Yoruba is the Accountant General of the Federation. The Yoruba hold the most critical positions, not just in the security and law enforcement sectors but also in the economy. The Yoruba may be the smartest Nigerians, but the gap isn’t this wide. Therefore, any attempt to sell this perfidy as meritocracy is political Yahoo-Yahoo. The abject and comprehensive servility of the National Assembly should be proof to Tinubu that many other Nigerians are as willing as the Yoruba to worship Tinubu, to sing On Your Mandate while lying face down at his feet. If so, why is Tinubu’s Tribalism so headlong, so relentless?

While refuting revenge as a motive for Tinubu’s Terrible Tribalism, I had wondered about the virtue of the entire NADECO and Afenifere enterprises of the 90s and early 2000s. Perhaps we had all been deceived into jumping onto a duplicitous wagon for group vendetta or ethnic actualisation, rather than national liberation. That attempt to interrogate the original authenticity of Afenifere because of the startling repudiation of its core principles by one of its champions provoked the former Afenifere leader, Ayo Adebanjo, who sadly died recently. In response to that article, Adebanjo had disowned Tinubu and disagreed vehemently that Tinubu was promoting any genuine Yoruba interests. He said Tinubu’s tribalism was dangerous cronyism, a patently self-serving adventure by a wolf in sheep’s clothing to turn Nigeria into a one-party state and become its life president.

In his response to that article, a former Minister in the Jonathan administration said he was baffled by the scale of Tinubu’s Tribalism, which he believed was borne of triumphalism. He wondered why Tinubu was recklessly alienating people of other tribes who were starting to respond by switching off, becoming apathetic, in many government institutions. He wondered how embracing only a section of the Yoruba, instead of the entire South, would help the president, assuming he had something deep-seated against the North and wanted to call its bluff. My response was that besides triumphalism, Tinubu wanted to conscript the Yoruba emotionally to protect and preserve his presidency as a Yoruba project. In addition to their block votes, which might compensate for some of the inevitable losses up North, the Yoruba intelligentsia, if pushed into ethnic defensiveness by any indiscriminate anti-Yoruba sentiment by the other groups, could become the formidable and validating voice to legitimise and promote him, his second term ambition, and possibly any life presidency ideas, no matter his performance. In other words, Tinubu could be banking on the benefits of becoming synonymous with Yoruba, arguably the country’s most enlightened clan.

Many years ago, Tinubu was an apostle of Sovereign National Conference. The SNC, that vehicle of inclusion, was supposed to transport ethnic nationalities to a people-oriented constitution to enthrone freedom, equity, social justice and prosperity in the nation. The SNC was the gbogborise fermented in Yoruba land, which must be administered to Nigeria, or it would inexorably perish. Then, Tinubu had said the cracks in the foundation of the nation demanded a fundamental overhaul. Those days, he regarded the unity of the country as desirable and negotiable, rather than inviolable and sacrosanct. Now, Tinubu regards that unity with callous levity. And perhaps any noisy agitation for a Sovereign National Conference now could easily be treated as treason.

For so many years, Tinubu and his political associates demanded true federalism, underlined by resource control and the devolution of powers. Those days they seemed the most principled politicians in Africa. They wanted decentralisation to curb the prevalent national ailment. That ailment was stagnation and inequity and the reign of mediocrity. Unavoidably, they wanted an end to Hausa Fulani hegemony. Now, Tinubu is cheerfully concentrating power in the hands of one ethnic group. It has become his obsession. Now, Tinubu no longer remembers the positions and appointments that defined lopsidedness, which made him and his friends cry about Hausa Fulani’s hegemony. They now say all positions are equal. Perhaps Tinubu thinks Nigerians are cows.

In truth, nobody expects habitually wheeling and dealing politicians to be averse to opportunism or to pass any strict tests of moral hygiene. But Tinubu’s brazen tribalism is confounding. Some say Tinubu has only revealed his true colours. But for some of us who saw some good in him, his industrial-scale tribalism is concerning. Because such crippling myopia could be a consequence of a more fundamental moral depreciation. In multi-ethnic African nations, rabid tribalism is always a recipe for stagnation and instability. Any concentration of power in a single ethnic group is always a disservice to the tribe and country. That Tinubu cannot foresee this ruin is worrisome. That he can, uninhibited by conscience, and with defiance, choose this course is pitiable.

Thomas Germain

With smartphones tougher than ever, a new wave of phone minimalists say cases are for cowards. I joined the case-free cult, called the experts and braced for the sound of broken glass.

A few months ago I walked into an Apple store to buy a new iPhone. After sifting through models and upgrades, a cheerful salesperson told me the price came to $1,199 (£919). She laughed when I mentioned that's close to what I pay for a month's rent. "Crazy, isn't it?" she said. "Now let's look at some phone cases."

It felt like the obvious next step. But even as the cost of cell phones breaches the stratosphere, some seemingly reasonable consumers going a different route: they're walking around with their phones completely naked, moving through the concrete and the spills and the dust with no case, no screen protector, nothing. I know some of these people. Their phones are shiny, with titanium fames and carefully engineered glass on full display. They seem so happy and carefree. Is it all in my head? Is fear the only thing standing between me and case-free bliss?

"Come on man, just check out how this thing feels," a friend said to me couple of weeks later. A proud no-case guy, he handed me his iPhone. It was far more handsome without a case, and even better to hold. "They build phones tougher now. I drop it all the time, it's fine."

According to conversations I've had since then with glass manufacturers, die-hard anti-casers and people who get paid to damage phones on purpose, it seems he could be right. Experts agree: the modern smartphone is far more robust than its ancestors. Still, most people I know use protection. So who's the crazy one here?

I decided to find out. When I got home, I tore the case off my phone, threw it in a drawer and committed to a month of sweating through the case-free lifestyle. I pitched my editor a story about it. He liked the idea but assured me the BBC would not pay for repairs if my experiment goes sour. May God have mercy on my soul.

Shattered glass

There's been a lot of discussion about how going caseless has become a status symbol for some who want to give off an air of class and confidence. When I interview tech executives and entrepreneurs, for example, phone cases are a rare sight.

"You're saying 'I can afford to replace this'. But it's not about appearances for me. I was a no-case guy even before my first startup," says Yousef Ali, chief executive of Blast Radio, a live audio platform for DJs. "For me it just seems nuts to have a $1,000 [£766] luxury device known for its material design and spend your day touching a $30 [£23] plastic case instead. It's like putting a vinyl cover on your couch to save the fabric. I have expensive pants too, should I wear an extra pair of pants to protect them? Where does it end?"

I won't pretend the first week without a phone case didn't leave me feeling, well, kind of cool. It's the lamest possible version of flirting with danger. But trends come and go. What I want is facts – ideally some harder than the ground I picture my phone careening towards.

It's true, you don't have to use a phone case anymore. But the real question is, are you a gambler? – Rich Fisco

If you're reading this on a mobile phone, you're probably looking through Gorilla Glass, a patented, smash-resistant technology made by a company called Corning. All the big-name phone manufacturers use Gorilla Glass or another Corning product for some or all of their screens, including Apple, Google, Huawei and Samsung. There are some exceptions for older phones and budget brands, but for the most part, Corning has the market cornered.

The Gorilla process starts with dipping glass in a bath of molten salt heated to 400C (752F). "The bath pulls smaller ions such as lithium out of the glass and swaps in larger ions such as potassium," says Lori Hamilton, Corning's director of technology for Gorilla Glass. "It creates this layer of compressive stress that makes it more difficult for flaws to penetrate through the glass." In other words, it squishes the glass together, making it less susceptible to damage.

Corning's research involves putting phones through ritualistic torture to study what goes wrong and how to prevent it. Phones face special glass scratching machines and go into tumblers with car keys to simulate pockets. Corning even collects phones busted by consumers in the wild to find unusual damage.

"Then we go through a CSI-type effort called fracture analysis, where we study tiny shards of glass to understand the source of the original fracture," Hamilton says.

When your phone breaks, it's the screen that fails most of the time. But according to Hamilton, results have improved dramatically in recent years, and today's smartphones are far stronger. In 2016, Corning reported that Gorilla Glass 5 survived drops of 0.8m (2.6ft) in the lab. That grew to 2m (6.6ft) with Gorilla Glass Victusin 2020. Gorilla Armor 2, one of Corning's latest products featured on the Samsung Ultra S25, has reportedly braved up to 2.2m (7.2ft).

Outside evidence seems to back up these improvements in phone materials, construction and design. In 2024, the insurance company Allstate, which sells phone protection plans, found that 78 million Americans reported damaging their phones, compared to 87 million in 2020.

"We don't use the term unbreakable," says Hamilton. "There will always be failures. There are always situations where you get a deep enough flaw or the right kind of bending." But Hamilton says skipping a case is reasonable, and at this point it's just a matter of preference. "After all, phones are an investment," she says. "I don't use a screen protector, but I actually do use a case." It's not for safety, though. It's a wallet case. "I just like a place to put cards and money.”

'It's made me more conscious of the thing'

Gorilla Glass was invented for the iPhone, though the latest models use a similar but upgraded Corning glass technology called "Ceramic Shield" made with "nano-ceramic crystals". Apple claims the latest iteration of Ceramic Sheild for the iPhone 16 makes it "2x tougher" than the glass on any other smartphone.

You might think those crystals and ions would be enough to shield me from spending money on a phone case, but manufacturers send mixed messages.

I have expensive pants too, should I wear an extra pair of pants to protect them? Where does it end? – Yousef Ali

Apple will sell you on the wonders of ceramics, but is also happy to sell you a case stamped with the Apple logo. My iPhone salesperson suggested I might like a nice blue one for $49 (£38). So, does an iPhone need a case? Apple wouldn't say: a spokesperson declined to comment.

Phone case manufacturer Spigen, on the other hand, was happy to talk. "It's true that phones are more durable than ever," says Justin Ma, a Spigen spokesperson. "However, despite these advancements, these devices are always prone to accidents," he says.

But even Ma wouldn't call a case necessary. "You might expect us to say everyone needs a case. But the reality is that it depends on the individual." Some people like the feel of a bare phone, some want maximum protection and still others choose a case for aesthetic purposes.

Whatever their reasons, case users are a massive contingency. Ma says Spigen cases alone cover 100 million devices. The consulting firm Towards Packaging clocked the global phone case market at almost $25bn (£19bn) in 2024.

I was standing in my kitchen drinking a glass of water when I got the itch for one last bedtime doomscroll. As I yanked my phone out of my pocket, my fingers slipped. My pristine iPhone made a ferocious arc through the air, bounced off the side of my refrigerator and landed hard, corner first, by my feet.

But when I checked, my phone was fine, saved perhaps by hardened glass, dumb luck or my gentle linoleum floor.

[Going caseless has] made me more conscious of the thing, and I find I don't get blindly sucked in as much as I used to. I can't believe I'm saying this but I think I'm actually using my phone less – Jonna Valenti

For Jonna Valenti, one half of a caseless couple based in North Carolina in the US, going without a case wasn't about science or status. "When I got my last phone, my daughter picked out the pink colour, and I didn't want to put a case on it because she just loved it so much," she says.

Valenti never looked back, and as time went by, she realised living without a case changed her relationship with her phone. "Because my fingers don't grip it as well, I just have more of an awareness," she says. "It's made me more conscious of the thing, and I find I don't get blindly sucked in as much as I used to. I can't believe I'm saying this but I think I'm actually using my phone less."

As romantic as Valenti makes it sound, I can't say the same. I'm as mindlessly glued to the internet as ever before.

The drop

Early in my career I worked at the magazine Consumer Reports, which has a full-on laboratory where teams of engineers have designed scientific tests to rate and review the products for almost 90 years. Just down the hall from my office was a crew that has rated cell phones for decades. To test for durability, Consumer Reports uses violence. If anyone knows the truth, it would be my old colleague Rich Fisco.

"We call it the drop test," says Fisco, who heads Consumer Reports' electronics testing. Phones go into a three-foot-long metal box with concrete panels at both ends, he says. Then the box spins, 50 times, slamming the phone against the concrete again and again. When the process is over, an engineer examines the device. If it survives, Fisco says they put the phone back in the box and give it yet another 50 drops.

"When the drop tests first started, about a third of phones would fail," says Fisco. "We haven't seen a phone fail the drop test in a long time. The glass has improved. These days they seem to be doing a lot better," he says.

"Look, I'm not saying the screen won't get scratched at some point, and if you drop it just right, or it lands on a little rock, say goodbye. But if your phone falls out of your hip pocket when you're walking down the street, the reality is it's probably not going to break," Fisco says. "It's true, you don't have to use a phone case anymore. But the real question is, are you a gambler?"

Even though Fisco publishes results that show dozens of phones passing the drop test every year, he still keeps his own device wrapped in a case. "Of course I do," he says. "I'm cheap."

I was rushing out the door on day 26 of my month with no case. Standing at the top of my building's staircase, I grabbed my phone to check on my commute to work. The next moment is a blur – I was probably being careless – but suddenly my phone was not in my hand but, in fact, tumbling out in front of me. I winced as it bounced down the steps once, twice and three times before clattering to a stop at the foot of the stairs.

I rushed down to rescue it, and lo and behold, there was a small gash in the corner of my iPhone's aluminium siding. The glass, however, was miraculously unscathed.

I spent the remaining days of my experiment playing it safe, clutching the phone tight on my rides on the subway, practicing mindfulness whenever I picked it up or set it down and on the whole simply using the thing a bit less.

My friend, on the other hand, wasn't so lucky. The next time we met up in the park, I asked him how his phone was doing. "Bad," he said. "I dropped it. It's smashed, cracked, the front and the camera lens." He was the first to call it ironic. Then again, he has an older iPhone. Maybe the newer ceramic glass would have saved him. Maybe not.

No matter how many salt baths they give your screen, glass is breakable. But I'm now convinced that with newer devices – and steadier hands than mine – a case really is optional if you're willing to accept some very real risks. By the end of the month, though, my nerves were shot. I'd been walking a tightrope, and while I'd survived a lot of bumps and drops, every near miss felt like a warning.

In the end, I'm back on the case. But every once in a while I still slip it off, just for the thrill, and let my phone feel the wind in its glass.

BBC

A United States District Court has ordered major US law enforcement agencies, including the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), to release documents relating to a decades-old investigation into Nigerian President Bola Tinubu.

Judge Beryl Howell of the District Court for the District of Columbia issued the ruling, stating that the agencies’ refusal to confirm or deny the existence of such records—known as a “Glomar response”—was “neither logical nor plausible,” particularly given the public disclosures already made over the years.

The ruling follows a lawsuit filed in June 2023 by American transparency advocate Aaron Greenspan under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Greenspan had requested records from six federal agencies—the FBI, DEA, IRS, CIA, Executive Office for US Attorneys (EOUSA), and Department of State—relating to investigations allegedly linking Tinubu and three other individuals, including Abiodun Agbele, to a heroin trafficking ring that operated in Chicago in the early 1990s.

All the agencies initially denied the requests using Glomar responses, refusing to confirm or deny the existence of the records. Greenspan challenged those responses, and Judge Howell ultimately ruled that the FBI and DEA must disclose relevant documents, as their justification for secrecy no longer holds. The court, however, upheld the CIA’s Glomar response, citing insufficient evidence that it had officially acknowledged the existence of any related records.

According to court filings submitted by Greenspan, Tinubu was named in a 1993 civil forfeiture case filed by the US Department of Justice, which sought to confiscate $460,000 linked to suspected narcotics proceeds in Tinubu’s bank accounts. An affidavit from IRS Special Agent Kevin Moss detailed how Agbele, one of Tinubu’s associates, was arrested after selling heroin to an undercover agent, and how subsequent investigations linked financial transactions involving Tinubu to the broader drug ring probe.

Despite Tinubu’s lawyers attempting to intervene in the case, citing privacy concerns and the applicability of FOIA exemptions, the court ruled that public interest in the matter outweighed those concerns. Howell noted that both the FBI and DEA had already, in various ways, acknowledged Tinubu’s connection to past investigations, weakening the legal basis for continued secrecy.

However, the Nigerian presidency has dismissed the US court’s ruling as inconsequential. In a statement on Sunday, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said the materials referenced—particularly the affidavit by Agent Moss—have “been in the public space for more than 30 years” and do not amount to any new revelations or indictments against Tinubu.

“There is nothing new to be revealed,” Onanuga insisted, adding that the president’s lawyers are reviewing the ruling, but stressing that the documents do not implicate Tinubu in any criminal wrongdoing.

The court has ordered the involved US agencies, excluding the CIA, to file a joint report by May 2 detailing the status of any remaining issues related to the FOIA requests focused on Tinubu and Agbele. While the legal battle in the US continues, the Nigerian government appears intent on downplaying its significance, maintaining that the president has already been cleared of any wrongdoing in connection to the decades-old drug trafficking case.

Veteran Nigerian rapper and activist Eedris Abdulkareem has launched a scathing critique of President Bola Tinubu and his son, Seyi Tinubu, over the country’s worsening economic conditions and what he calls a lack of empathy from the political elite.

Speaking on Channels Television’s Rubbin’ Minds on Sunday, the outspoken artist dismissed Seyi Tinubu’s earlier claim that his father is “the greatest president in the history of Nigeria,” made during a political event in Adamawa State in March.

“Tinubu may be the best father to Seyi,” Eedris said, “but he is the worst president Nigeria has ever had. Young people are jobless, and many can’t even afford to eat. Let Seyi travel across Nigeria without security and feel what the masses are going through.”

Eedris’ criticism forms the core of his latest single, Tell Your Papa, a protest song that quickly went viral on social media before being banned by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC). The NBC directed all broadcast stations to stop airing the track, labeling it unfit for public consumption.

The rapper said the song was directly inspired by Seyi Tinubu’s public praise of his father. “If he didn’t make that video, I wouldn’t have made the song,” he said. “Nigerian youths are not asking for much — just electricity, jobs, security, and a functioning economy. Not palliatives.”

In Tell Your Papa, Eedris calls on Seyi Tinubu to urge his father to confront Nigeria’s growing hardship and insecurity. The track has drawn comparisons to Eedris’ infamous 2004 protest anthem Nigeria Jaga Jaga, which was banned during President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration but has remained relevant for two decades.

“Twenty-four years later, Jaga Jaga still resonates. That says a lot about the state of our nation,” he remarked during the interview.

Two prominent labour leaders, Andrew Emelieze and Itoro Obong, have petitioned the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the United Nations (UN), accusing President Bola Tinubu’s administration of exploiting Nigerian workers.

Emelieze, a former Chairman of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) in Oyo State, and Obong, Vice Chairman of the Association of Hospital and Administrative Pharmacists of Nigeria (Akwa Ibom chapter), jointly submitted the complaint under the Federal Workers’ Forum (FWF).

In the petition, they announced plans to stage an indefinite nationwide protest starting April 22, 2025, over what they described as the Nigerian government’s unfair treatment of workers.

The labour leaders condemned the executive, legislative, and judicial branches for failing to protect workers' rights, stating: “The government has implemented harsh policies, including fuel price hikes, naira devaluation, and soaring inflation, while ignoring ILO and UN conventions on fair wages and decent working conditions.”*

They further accused the Tinubu administration of continuing the “anti-worker policies” of past governments, leaving salaries stagnant amid rising living costs. The petition also linked Nigeria’s economic crisis to increased illegal migration, citing the country’s high rate of deadly Mediterranean crossings.

The FWF demanded sanctions against the Nigerian government and criticized the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and TUC for inadequate worker representation.

“Workers are treated with disdain, and the current administration has done nothing to improve their plight,” the petition read. “We call on the ILO and UN to hold Nigeria accountable.”

The planned protest aims to pressure the government into addressing workers’ demands for better wages and working conditions.

The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has announced that operating unregistered digital asset exchanges and online foreign exchange trading platforms is now illegal under the recently enacted Investments and Securities Act (ISA) 2025.

President Bola Tinubu signed the legislation into law last month, with the SEC stating that the new act aims to strengthen Nigeria's capital market and adapt to the evolving digital finance landscape.

In a weekend statement, the SEC warned that non-compliance is now a punishable offense: "By virtue of this Act, it is an offence in Nigeria for any entity that is not registered by the Commission to carry out the business of online foreign exchange trading platforms or related services."

Entities planning to establish businesses in these sectors are advised to contact the HOD DRM Department of the Commission for registration guidance to avoid sanctions.

The new legislation significantly expands the SEC's regulatory authority. Section 3(3)(b) of the Act explicitly empowers the Commission to "register and regulate securities exchanges, commodity exchanges, virtual and digital asset exchanges, and other market venues."

SEC Director-General Emomotimi Agama described the ISA 2025 as transformative for Nigeria's capital market, providing "legal backing to ensure investor protection and enhance market confidence, especially in new and previously unregulated segments such as digital asset exchanges and online foreign exchange platforms."

While affirming the Commission's support for innovation, Agama emphasized that it must occur "within a regulated environment that protects investors and maintains market integrity."

The SEC has advised all stakeholders in the financial and investment ecosystem to familiarize themselves with the new provisions and ensure full compliance with ISA 2025.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Israeli missiles strike Gaza hospital, patients evacuated

Two Israeli missiles hit a major Gaza hospital on Sunday, putting the emergency department out of action and damaging other structures, medics said, in a strike which Israel said was aimed at Hamas fighters exploiting the facility.

Health officials at the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital evacuated patients after a phone call from someone who identified himself as Israeli security shortly before the attack.

No casualties were reported in the strike. The Israeli military said in a statement that it had taken steps to reduce harm to civilians before it struck the compound, which it said was being used by Hamas militants to plan attacks. Hamas rejected the accusation and called for an international investigation.

The hospital - an institution run by the Anglican Church in Jerusalem - was no longer operational, according to Gaza's health ministry.

"Hundreds of patients and injured people had to be evacuated in the middle of the night, and many of them are now out in the streets without medical care, which puts their lives at risk," said ministry spokesperson Khalil Al-Deqran.

Sunday's strikes came as Hamas leaders began a fresh round of talks in Cairo in a bid to salvage a stalled ceasefire agreement with Israel, as Egypt, Qatar, and the United States attempted to bridge gaps between the sides.

Reuters footage showed significant destruction in and outside the hospital compound's church, and patients who could not leave.

WARNING

"The scene was scary. From last night until now, I haven't slept a single minute out of fear. All night, glass was shattering over us inside," said an injured man, Mohammed Abu Nasser.

The Episcopal Church in Jerusalem said the warning to evacuate the hospital came 20 minutes before the strike that destroyed the two-storey genetic laboratory, and damaged the pharmacy and emergency department buildings and other surrounding structures.

"We call upon all governments and people of goodwill to intervene to stop all kinds of attacks on medical and humanitarian institutions," the church said in a statement.

The Palestinian foreign ministry and Hamas condemned the attack, saying Israel was destroying Gaza's healthcare system.

Israel says Hamas systematically exploits civilian structures, including hospitals, which the militant group denies. Israeli forces have carried out numerous raids in medical facilities in Gaza.

In October 2023, a deadly blast at a parking lot in the compound of Al-Ahli hospital was blamed by Hamas on an Israeli airstrike. Israel said a failed rocket launch by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad group had caused the blast.

The militant group denied it was responsible. An investigation by Human Rights Watch concluded the explosion was most likely caused by a failed Palestinian rocket launch.

OTHER STRIKES

Separate strikes in the enclave on Sunday killed at least 30 Palestinians, including the head of a police station in Khan Younis, in the southern part of the Hamas-run enclave, according to Hamas and health authorities. Six brothers were killed when an Israeli strike hit their car in Deir Al-Balah in central Gaza Strip, medics said.

Later on Sunday, the Israeli military said it had located and destroyed a 1.2 km underground tunnel used by militants in the northern Gaza Strip. It said it struck several militants identified as planting a bomb near the Israeli soldiers carrying out the operation to demolish the tunnel.

The armed wing of Hamas, meanwhile, said its fighters detonated bombs they had planted in a house in eastern Rafah, in the south of the enclave, after Israeli soldiers entered it.

The war in Gaza was triggered by Hamas' October 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel, in which 1,200 people were killed and 251 taken hostage, according to Israeli tallies.

Since then, more than 50,900 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli offensive, according to local health authorities. Much of Gaza is in ruins and most of its population has been displaced.

Reuters