k

THE MSN QUIZ GAME
If you think you know the MSN then take this quiz to see how much you know about them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qe_YRd2i1c

As a graduate of international studies and diplomacy, i will take this issue bit by bit so that we do not get issues twisted. Secondly, I am not President M Buhari spokesperson, but this opinion is entirely mine. To address this issue, let me take a recourse to section 5 sub section 4 of 1999 constitution as amended, it states that,' (a) the president shall not declare a state of war between the federation and other country except with the sanction of a resolution of both Houses of National Assembly sitting in a joint session, and (b) except with the prior approval of the senate, no member of the Nigeria armed forces should be deployed outside the country for a combat mission. from the above, the president is under obligation to seek approval before the deployment of Nigeria Armed men for internal or external armed combat, war or conflict as the case maybe.
However, there is a a rider to section 5 which read thus, notwithstanding the provision of section 5 subsection 4 of this section, the president in consultation with the National Defence Council , may deploy members of the armed forces of the country on a limited combat duty outside Nigeria if he is satisfied that the National security is under threat or danger: provided that the President shall within 7 days of actual combat engagement, seek the consent of the senate and the senate shall within 14 days thereafter give or refuse the consent.
Now, from the community reading of the above provisions, it is also clear that the approval of the National Assembly may be sought proactively or retroactively. In other words, the president is at liberty to seek such approval before or after deployment of army, provided he suspects that there is a threat to national security. obviously, that is the question of fact.
Another angle to the issue is to examine the rationale or reason for the deployment of the army inside or outside the country. is the deployment for "combat", "war" or "peace keeping"? if the rationale for deployment is for war or combat, then the above provisions will always apply. No doubt about that. if it is for "peace keeping", then it does not seem the President would need the approval of the National Assembly. it can be argued therefore that the president may only need the approval of the National Assembly where He has declared a combat mission or war internally or externally. In that case, it would seem that any deployment for peace keeping such as under the ECOMOG, UN or AU mandate may not require the approval of National Assembly. This is more so there are an extant bilateral or multi lateral agreements, ratified by Nigeria for such joint military action either at regional or global level. By such extant bilateral and multi lateral agreements, there are a number of them such as the ECOMOG Army under the ECOWAS Treaty Of 1975, it would seem that the President already has a blank cheque for deployment from time to time. The only exception here may be where such foreign intervention is a sole Nigeria Expedition.
Finally, the President Buhari is under every obligation to respect any treaty, bilateral or multilateral, to which Nigeria is a signatory. ECOWAS Treaty, AU Charter and UN Charter are few examples of such agreements. Nigeria is going to Gambia under ECOMOG which is a creation of ECOWAS treaty. Its goal is purely for peace keeping not for combat. To Me, President Buhari should be encourage to restore Nigeria to continue to play its role as a Big Brother in Africa Politics.

No be only impeach...na impee

Qmerit:
What is "breaking here" this OP is a confused sobori!
So, where SARAKI called your Ipob sinator to order is not in ur post? Lobbish! Go and impeach him now!

In your life ve u even opened the so called constitution for once? The president has the right as a matter of urgency to deploy military personnels for such a thing and send and approval letter to the senate within 7 working days! Which the president still ve 6days to do so! Ude.

if the country is under imminent threat. ...don't omit that part..now are we under imminent threat? You ppl n blind sentimental support..

revolt:
if the country is under imminent threat. ...don't omit that part..now are we under imminent threat? You ppl n blind sentimental support..

Hahahahaha not Nigeria that is under Imminent threat but Gambia so Nigeria govt responded cause of it position in Africa so what the hell re u talking about here!

He probably forgot that he's still in Training for Democracy Credentials.

https://mobile.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1505490266180188&id=806891979373357&refid=17&_ft_=top_level_post_id.1505490266180188%3Atl_objid.1505490266180188%3Athid.806891979373357%3A306061129499414%3A44%3A0%3A1485935999%3A-2777694974228511810#footer_action_list

fb.com/gistburst, like also!!!

WHEN A JEW SINATOR GETS TO THE SENATE JUST FOR BEING ONE OF THE TOUTS HIS BENEFACTOR USES, YOU CAN EXCUSE THE SINATOR'S IGNORANCE OF THE LAW HE IS PURPPOTED TO MAKE.

IMPEACH A PRESIDENT FOR DEPLOYING TROOP FOR A PEACEKEEPING OPERATION?

DAMN IG-NO-RAN-CE.

Nobody can touch my president he must finish his 8yrs even ojukwu wake up frm deád

Did anyone see that line? " after 7 days of ACTUAL COMBAT ENGAGEMENT.

Hmmmmm ok

Qmerit:


Hahahahaha not Nigeria that is under Imminent threat but Gambia so Nigeria govt responded cause of it position in Africa so what the hell re u talking about here!

Bros use thy brain. Its only if Nigeria is under threat he can engage without senate approval. Clearly he violated that law.

revolt:
Bros use thy brain. Its only if Nigeria is under threat he can engage without senate approval. Clearly he violated that law.

shutup bros! So, what Saraki said is false ba as the head of senate.. he should know better than u and I

Qmerit:
What is "breaking here" this OP is a confused sobori!
So, where SARAKI called your Ipob sinator to order is not in ur post? Lobbish! Go and impeach him now!

In your life ve u even opened the so called constitution for once? The president has the right as a matter of urgency to deploy military personnels for such a thing and send letter to the senate within 7 working days for approval Which means the president still ve 6days to do so! Ude.

. Was our national security under threat? That is the only criteria that such an action can be taken. How does the political turmoil in The Gambia translate into a threat to our national security?

[[s]quote author=PaulKillerman post=52990063]. Was our national security under threat? That is the only criteria that such an action can be taken. How does the political turmoil in The Gambia translate into a threat to our national security? [/quote][/s]

Shut the fuçk up! You should ve asked who is Nigeria in West Africa and Africa generally... When Nigeria over the years go for peace keeping in other countries across Africa, was Nigeria under security threat! Lobbish

Qmerit:


shutup bros! So, what Saraki said is false ba as the head of senate.. he should know better than u and I

goat .... Saraki jus played politics with it...it's written ..read it dunno

Qmerit:
[[s]quote author=PaulKillerman post=52990063]. Was our national security under threat? That is the only criteria that such an action can be taken. How does the political turmoil in The Gambia translate into a threat to our national security? [/s]

Shut the fuçk up! You should ve asked who is Nigeria in West Africa and Africa generally... When Nigeria over the years go for peace keeping in other countries across Africa, was Nigeria under security threat! Lobbish

during obj tenure the senate approved ....the other times ie ibb n abacha periods in Liberia there was no senate ....groans ..that's how u ppl voted old papa as presido n now ure crying ....

[[s]quote author=revolt post=53006497]during obj tenure the senate approved ....the other times ie ibb n abacha periods in Liberia there was no senate ....groans ..that's how u ppl voted old papa as presido n now ure crying ....[/quote][/s]

God will punish you ok.
Frustration is your nick name:
Did I tell you I'm crying? I love PMB so deal with it for the period.

PASCHAL28:
As a graduate of international studies and diplomacy, i will take this issue bit by bit so that we do not get issues twisted. Secondly, I am not President M Buhari spokesperson, but this opinion is entirely mine. To address this issue, let me take a recourse to section 5 sub section 4 of 1999 constitution as amended, it states that,' (a) the president shall not declare a state of war between the federation and other country except with the sanction of a resolution of both Houses of National Assembly sitting in a joint session, and (b) except with the prior approval of the senate, no member of the Nigeria armed forces should be deployed outside the country for a combat mission. from the above, the president is under obligation to seek approval before the deployment of Nigeria Armed men for internal or external armed combat, war or conflict as the case maybe.
However, there is a a rider to section 5 which read thus, notwithstanding the provision of section 5 subsection 4 of this section, the president in consultation with the National Defence Council , may deploy members of the armed forces of the country on a limited combat duty outside Nigeria if he is satisfied that the National security is under threat or danger: provided that the President shall within 7 days of actual combat engagement, seek the consent of the senate and the senate shall within 14 days thereafter give or refuse the consent.
Now, from the community reading of the above provisions, it is also clear that the approval of the National Assembly may be sought proactively or retroactively. In other words, the president is at liberty to seek such approval before or after deployment of army, provided he suspects that there is a threat to national security. obviously, that is the question of fact.
Another angle to the issue is to examine the rationale or reason for the deployment of the army inside or outside the country. is the deployment for "combat", "war" or "peace keeping"? if the rationale for deployment is for war or combat, then the above provisions will always apply. No doubt about that. if it is for "peace keeping", then it does not seem the President would need the approval of the National Assembly. it can be argued therefore that the president may only need the approval of the National Assembly where He has declared a combat mission or war internally or externally. In that case, it would seem that any deployment for peace keeping such as under the ECOMOG, UN or AU mandate may not require the approval of National Assembly. This is more so there are an extant bilateral or multi lateral agreements, ratified by Nigeria for such joint military action either at regional or global level. By such extant bilateral and multi lateral agreements, there are a number of them such as the ECOMOG Army under the ECOWAS Treaty Of 1975, it would seem that the President already has a blank cheque for deployment from time to time. The only exception here may be where such foreign intervention is a sole Nigeria Expedition.
Finally, the President Buhari is under every obligation to respect any treaty, bilateral or multilateral, to which Nigeria is a signatory. ECOWAS Treaty, AU Charter and UN Charter are few examples of such agreements. Nigeria is going to Gambia under ECOMOG which is a creation of ECOWAS treaty. Its goal is purely for peace keeping not for combat. To Me, President Buhari should be encourage to restore Nigeria to continue to play its role as a Big Brother in Africa Politics.

International treaties are not binding on Nigeria except when it is domesticated by an act of the national assembly true or false?

Nigeria democrazy is in theory but not in practice. Nigeria is a lawless country where laws can only be interpreted for the privileged that can afford the odious process.

However, sending that gambia ape packing without turning that relatively peaceful land into another desolate part of africa is commendable and he should be forgiven for not consulting the thieving lawmakers who are themselves inherently lawless.