Connect with us

Politics

US: Supreme Court blocks Trump’s freeze of $2 billion in aid

Published

on

On Monday, Trump made his first speech before the US Congress since the start of his second term © Alex Brandon/AP Photo/picture alliance

The US Supreme Court denied the administration’s request to block payments for the work that foreign organizations have already completed. The dispute is due to continue in lower courts. DW has more.

 

US Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to withold $2 billion in foreign aid Greenland’s prime minister to Trump: ‘We are not for sale’

This blog on the developments from Donald Trump’s first weeks in office on Thursday, February 13, 2025

Supreme Court upholds order to release $2 billion in foreign aid payments

The US Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that President Donald Trump’s administration cannot stop payments to foreign aid organizations for work they have already completed for the government.

The court supported US District Judge Amir Ali’s decision, which ordered the Trump administration to quickly release funding to contractors and grant recipients from the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department for their past work.

Ali had ordered the US State Department and USAID to pay nearly $2 billion to contractors by midnight on Wednesday last week.

The Trump administration turned to the Supreme Court as the deadline approached. They argued that handling claims properly in such a short time was impossible.

By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court told Ali to “clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.”

The court’s decision, however, keeps Ali’s temporary restraining order in place, which stopped the spending freeze.

Panama president denounces Trump’s Canal claims

Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino said Wednesday President Donald Trump was lying when he claimed that the United States was “reclaiming” the Panama Canal.

In his first speech to Congress after becoming president again, Trump welcomed a deal by a group led by giant asset manager BlackRock to acquire two Panama Canal ports

He described this deal as an early step in his administration’s plan to “reclaim” the important waterway.

President Mulino, however accused Trump of “once again lying” in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

“The Panama Canal is not in the process of being reclaimed … the Canal is Panamanian and will continue to be Panamanian!”

Panama, took over control of the crucial international waterway in 1999 under a treaty negotiated with the United States 20 years earlier.

Trump has repeatedly threatened to “take back” control of the Panama Canal.

A consortium led by US firm BlackRock has agreed to purchase the ports of Balboa and Cristobal on either end of the canal from a Hong Kong-based company CK Hutchison. The canal is home to several other ports.

Greenland’s prime minister rejects Trump’s acquisition plans

Greenland’s prime minister said, “Greenland is ours” and cannot be taken or sold.

This was in response to President Donald Trump, who told Congress the United States would acquire the territory “one way or another.”

“Kalaallit Nunaat is ours,” Prime Minister Múte Bourup Egede wrote, using Greenlandic for the “Land of the People” or the “Land of the Greenlanders.”

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, in an interview with broadcaster TV2, echoed Egede in repeating that Greenland is not for sale.

Located in the Arctic Circle, Greenland sits between Canada and northern Europe.

Although an autonomous territory, it is still ruled by the Danish crown. Any American effort to acquire Greenland would therefore have to include Denmark.

Politics

OHANAEZE YOUTH COUNCIL REPLIES NORTHERN ELDERS FORUM: YES, IGBO YOUTHS WANT BIAFRA

Published

on

 

By Comrade Igboayaka O. Igboayaka

President OHANEZE YOUTH COUNCIL

The Ohanaeze Youth Council (OYC) has formally replied to the recent statement credited to the Northern Elders Forum, wherein they suggested that if Igbo youths truly desire Biafra, the Nigerian government should not stand in their way.

While we acknowledge this rare moment of honesty, OYC states clearly and unequivocally:-Yes — Igbo youths want Biafra. And this desire is not born out of hatred, but out of decades of injustice, exclusion, and systemic oppression.

The agitation for Biafra is the direct consequence of Nigeria’s persistent failure to build an equitable and inclusive federation.

WHY IGBO YOUTHS ARE DEMANDING BIAFRA

Our position is anchored on undeniable realities:-

*1. Political Differences:-Nigeria’s political structure has consistently marginalized the Southeast. Since the return to democracy in 1999, the Igbo nation has been deliberately excluded from key leadership positions, particularly the Presidency and critical security offices. Federal appointments, resource control, and political representation remain grossly imbalanced against Ndigbo.The so-called federal system operates more like a unitary arrangement where certain regions dominate while others are reduced to spectators.*

*2. Social Differences:-Social integration in Nigeria has collapsed. Igbo citizens face profiling, harassment, and selective enforcement of laws across different parts of the country. Peaceful protests in Igboland are met with military brutality, while violent extremism elsewhere often receives negotiation and amnesty.This double standard has deepened alienation among Igbo youths.*

*3. Cultural Differences:-Our language, traditions, and values are neither protected nor promoted within the Nigerian framework. Instead, Igbo culture is routinely undermined and treated as inferior. A nation that fails to respect the cultural identity of its people cannot claim unity.*

*4. Religious Differences:-Religious intolerance has become normalized. Christian communities in the Southeast feel increasingly threatened in a country where religious bias influences policy, security response, and governance. The absence of genuine religious neutrality further widens the divide.*

*5. Ethnic Hate Against Ndigbo:- Anti-Igbo rhetoric has been openly displayed in national discourse. From threats of expulsion to hate speeches and coordinated attacks, Ndigbo have become targets within their own country. Properties belonging to Igbos are often destroyed during crises, with little or no compensation or justice.This persistent hostility sends a clear message;we are not wanted.*

*6. Systemic Marginalization:- From abandoned federal roads to exclusion from major infrastructure projects, from poor seaport development to economic strangulation, the Southeast remains deliberately underdeveloped. Igbo youths graduate into unemployment, poverty, and despair while watching other regions benefit disproportionately from national resources.*

*This is not accidental. It is structural.*

*OUR MESSAGE IS SIMPLE*
*Igbo youths are not asking for war.*

*Igbo youths are asking for dignity.*

*Igbo youths are asking for freedom.*

*Igbo youths are asking for self-determination.*

*If Nigeria cannot guarantee justice, equity, and equal opportunity for all, then the call for Biafra becomes not just legitimate — but inevitable.*

*To the Northern Elders Forum: we appreciate your acknowledgment. Now let the Nigerian state also have the courage to respect the democratic will of a people.*


*You cannot force unity where there is no justice.*

*Powered by OHANAEZE YOUTH COUNCIL (OYC)*

Continue Reading

Politics

FULL LIST: Nigeria now has 21 registered political parties

Published

on

 

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has approved two new political parties ahead of the 2027 general elections, raising the total number of registered parties in Nigeria to 21.

INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan (SAN), announced the approval of the Democratic Leadership Alliance (DLA) and the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) in Abuja on Thursday. While DLA met all statutory requirements, NDC was registered following a Federal High Court order.

Full list of registered political parties in Nigeria:

All Progressives Congress (APC)
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)
Accord (A)
Social Democratic Party (SDP)
Labour Party (LP)
All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA)
African Democratic Congress (ADC)
Boot Party (BP)
Action Democratic Party (ADP)
African Action Congress (AAC)
Action Alliance (AA)
National Rescue Movement (NRM)
Zenith Labour Party (ZLP)
New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP)
Allied Peoples Movement (APM)
Peoples Redemption Party (PRP)
Action Peoples Party (APP)
Young Progressives Party (YPP)
Youth Party (YP)
Democratic Leadership Alliance (DLA) – new
Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) – new

INEC said the new parties were registered as part of efforts to deepen democratic participation and broaden political choices for Nigerians.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nnamdi Kanu appeals conviction, faults terrorism trial

Published

on

Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu. Photo: X/Aloy Ejimakor

The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a notice of appeal challenging his conviction and multiple sentences imposed by the Federal High Court in Abuja, insisting that the trial was riddled with fundamental legal errors and amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

In the notice of appeal dated February 4, 2026, Kanu said he was appealing against his conviction and sentences on seven counts, including terrorism-related offences, for which he received five life sentences and additional prison terms after being found guilty on November 20, 2025.

“I, Nnamdi Kanu, the Appellant, having been convicted and sentenced… do hereby give notice of appeal against my conviction,” the document stated.

Kanu was convicted for offences including “committing an act preparatory to or in furtherance of an act of terrorism,” “making a broadcast… with intent to intimidate the population,” and “being the leader and member of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a proscribed organisation in Nigeria,” among others.

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, delivered the judgment on November 20, 2025, sentencing Kanu to five life terms for terrorism-related offences, 20 years’ imprisonment for being the leader of the proscribed IPOB, and five years’ imprisonment with no option of fine for importing a radio transmitter without a licence.

In his grounds of appeal, the IPOB leader accused the trial court of failing to resolve what he described as a “foundational disruption of the original trial process” following the 2017 military operation at his Afara-Ukwu residence.

“The learned trial judge erred in law by failing to resolve the procedural and competence consequences of the foundational disruption of the original trial process in September 2017,” Kanu argued.

He also contended that the court proceeded to trial and judgment while his preliminary objection challenging the competence of the proceedings remained unresolved.

 

“The learned trial judge did not hear or determine the objection,” the appeal document stated, adding that judgment was delivered “while the objection remained pending and undetermined.”

Kanu further faulted the court for delivering judgment while his bail application was still pending, arguing that this affected the fairness of the trial process.

He also claimed that the trial court convicted him under a law that had already been repealed, stating that “the learned trial judge erred in law by convicting and sentencing the Appellant under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013, notwithstanding its repeal by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, prior to judgment.”

Kanu further argued that he was subjected to double jeopardy, contrary to Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution, after being retried on facts he said had earlier been nullified by the Court of Appeal.

He also complained that he was denied fair hearing, claiming that he was not allowed to file or present a final written address before judgment was delivered.

Among the reliefs sought, Kanu asked the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, quash his conviction and sentences, and “discharge and acquit the Appellant in respect of all the counts.”

He also informed the appellate court of his desire to be present at the hearing of the appeal, stating, “I want to be present at the hearing of the appeal because I may be conducting the appeal in person.”

Kanu is currently being held at a correctional facility in Sokoto State, after his application to be transferred to a different facility in either Niger or Nasarawa State was denied.

Continue Reading

Trending