Who di reciprocal non-immigrant visa restriction wey US announce go affect for Nigeria
On Tuesday, 8 July di United States Mission for Nigeria for statement bin announce sweeping changes to dia non-immigrant visa policy for Nigeria, wey reduce di duration and conditions under which most Nigerian travellers go fit enta America.
Dem announce say, "Effective immediately most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas issued to citizens of Nigeria go be single-entry visas wit a three-month validity period.
Dis move na part of one global reciprocity rearrangement, wey be sharp departure from previous visa terms, wey bin often allow for multiple entries ova two years or more.
For years, di US don issue Nigerians 5-year visitor visas and 2-year student visas, even though Nigeria dey only offer single-entry visas valid for three months only for those wey dey plan to visit di kontri from US.
"We wish to note say, as e be standard globally, visa reciprocity na continuous process and e dey subject to review and change at any time, such as increasing or decreasing permitted entries and duration of validity," di statement read.
"Di US non-immigrant visas issued prior to July 8, 2025, go retain dia status and validity," di statement add.
Dis reciprocity no apply to pipo wey get immigrant visa, na only for non-immigrant and nondiplomatic visa.
Di Nigerian govment neva respond to dis development yet.
Wetin be US non-immigrant visa and who fall under dis category
Di US govment dey issue non-immigrant visas to foreign national wey wan enta di kontri on temporary basis - for tourism, business, medical treatment, business, temporary work, study, or oda similar reasons.
Di most common types of US temporary visas include di following:
Wetin Reciprocity mean?
Reciprocity simply mean treating citizens of kontris equally under di law.
Non-immigrant visa applicants from certain kontris like Nigeria or areas of authority fit need to pay visa issuance fee afta dem approve dia application. Dis fees na based on di principle of reciprocity: E.g, foreign govment compulsory fees on U.S. citizens for certain types of visas, di United States go impose similar fee on citizens of dat kontri or area of authority for similar types of visas.
Wetin Nigeria law tok about other citizens getting visa to visit
Nigeria goment dey issue different visas to pipo wey wan enta di kontri depending on di purpose of di visit.
Short Visit Visas dey allow travellers visit Nigeria for a period not exceeding three months (90 days) for di purpose of visit, tourism, business meeting, conference, seminar, contract negotiation, marketing, sales, purchase, distribution of Nigerian goods, Trade Fairs, job interview, sports, entertainment, study tour, academic exchange programme, humanitarian services, relief/emergency works, and temporary work permits.
Tourism Visa: Nigeria immigration dey give single-entry, 30-day visa for tourism and sightseeing for Nigeria. Applicants must get valid passport, return ticket, evidence of accommodation and bank statement to show sufficient funds. Dem restrict am strictly for leisure and no allow work or extensions. Minors also need parental consent documents.
Student Visa: Dem dey issue student visa to individuals wey wan pursue full-time studies at approved Nigerian educational institutions. Di visa dey valid for di duration of di academic program, and applicant fit renew am one year at a time.
Meanwhile, for dia statement, di U.S. govment say dem dey work closely wit Nigerian authorities to ensure say di kontri meet key international standards, wey include:
"Di United States value dia longstanding relationship wit Nigeria and remain committed to expanding our partnership based on mutual respect, shared security priorities, and economic opportunity, keeping both our kontris safer and stronger," di statement add.
Dem encourage Nigerian travellers to respect and stick to di terms of dia visas, and ensure travel documents dey authentic, accurate, and up to date.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
20 minutes ago
- Reuters
US defense bill proposes examination of Apple display supplier
SAN FRANCISCO, Aug 1 (Reuters) - A measure added into a massive U.S. defense spending bill in recent weeks will, if passed, ask the Pentagon to determine whether one of Apple's (AAPL.O), opens new tab display suppliers should be listed as a Chinese military company. Being on the list does not block companies from doing business in the U.S. but will in coming years block them from being part of the U.S. military's supply chain. The bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, was approved in July by key committees in both houses of the U.S. Congress. The final bill, considered a "must-pass" because it funds the U.S. military, is expected to become law later in the year. When the bill was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, a newly added amendment for the first time asked the U.S. Defense Department to consider, opens new tab whether BOE Technology Group Co , listed on Apple's official suppliers list, should be added to a list of firms that allegedly aid China's military. BOE and Apple did not respond to requests for comment. Craig Singleton, a China expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington think-tank, said Beijing had offered billions of dollars in subsidies, tax breaks and loans to help firms such as BOE dominate global panel production. "This creates a single‑source vulnerability that could be easily exploited to disrupt or degrade U.S. military operations, not to mention undermine commercial supply chains, during a conflict or period of heightened bilateral tension with Beijing," Singleton added. A study published last month by New York-based NERA Economic Consulting and commissioned by BOE's U.S. subsidiary found that the display industry, which includes major Korean players such as Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics, remains highly competitive, with no single player capable of significantly affecting global prices. "There is no credible risk of a supply chain disruption by mainland China display manufacturers," the report said.
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump administration freezes $339M in UCLA grants and accuses the school of rights violations
The Trump administration is freezing $339 million in research grants to the University of California, Los Angeles, accusing the school of civil rights violations related to antisemitism, affirmative action and women's sports, according to a person familiar with the matter. The federal government has frozen or paused federal funding over similar allegations against private colleges but this is one of the rare cases it has targeted a public university. Several federal agencies notified UCLA this week that they were suspending grants over civil rights concerns, including $240 million from the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health, according to the person, who spoke about internal deliberations on the condition of anonymity. The Trump administration recently announced the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.' Last week, Columbia agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into the government's allegations that the school violated federal antidiscrimination laws. The agreement also restores more than $400 million in research grants. The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation. The National Science Foundation said in a statement it informed UCLA that it was suspending funding awards because the school isn't in line with the agency's priorities. UCLA's chancellor Julio Frenk called the government's decision 'deeply disappointing.' 'With this decision, hundreds of grants may be lost, adversely affecting the lives and life-changing work of UCLA researchers, faculty and staff," he said in a statement. The Department of Energy said in its letter it found several 'examples of noncompliance' and faulted UCLA for inviting applicants to disclose their race in personal statements and for considering factors including family income and ZIP code. Affirmative action in college admissions was outlawed in California in 1996 and struck down by the Supreme Court in 2023. The letter said the school has taken steps that amount to 'a transparent attempt to engage in race-based admissions in all but name,' disadvantaging white, Jewish and Asian American applicants. It also said UCLA fails to promote an environment free from antisemitism and discriminates against women by allowing transgender women to compete on women's teams. Frenk said that in its letter the federal government "claims antisemitism and bias as the reasons' to freeze the funding but 'this far-reaching penalty of defunding life-saving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination.' Earlier this week, UCLA reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and a Jewish professor who sued the university arguing it violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protesters in 2024 to block their access to classes and other areas on campus. UCLA initially had argued that it had no legal responsibility over the issue because protesters, not the university, blocked Jewish students' access to some areas. The university also worked with law enforcement to thwart attempts to set up new protest camps. The university has said that it's committed to campus safety and inclusivity and will continue to implement recommendations. ___ Rodriguez reported from San Francisco and Binkley from Washington.
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Democrats find it hard to move on when Biden and Harris keep hogging the spotlight
Donald Trump is President of the United States. Republicans control all three branches of government. And even as Democrats are planning to regroup and contest next year's midterm elections, the two people who many of them blame for last year's dismal election outcome simply will not go away. More than half a year after they left office after a single four-year term, former president Joe Biden and former vice president Kamala Harris are continuing to remain in the spotlight and allow Republicans to highlight their failures instead of letting their party move on and find a way to regain the support that was lost during their time in office. Harris, who lost all seven of the contested swing states in last year's election, recently announced an upcoming book that will focus on the 107-day campaign she waged against Trump after Biden withdrew from the 2024 race following his dismal debate performance last June. She also revealed that she won't enter the upcoming race to succeed California Governor Gavin Newsom, who must leave office in 2027 when his second four-year term ends, leaving open the possibility that she'll enter what is expected to be a crowded primary race for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. Biden, whose 11th hour pardons of his family members and other political allies emboldened Trump to grant reprieves for the violent rioters who tried to prevent his 2020 loss from being certified, is still giving speeches in which he is attacking his predecessor-turned-successor, a stark contrast from how most former presidents have behaved after leaving office. At one such appearance, an address to the National Bar Association in Chicago on Thursday, he accused the Trump administration of 'doing its best to dismantle the Constitution,' giving right-wing media outlets plenty of fodder to use at a time when his party is trying to focus on the future and the current government's policy problems. And the president's son, Hunter Biden, is doing his best to stay in the headlines with a series of podcast appearances in which he casts blame for his father's exit from the race on a broad range of people — but not his father. The former Democratic ticket's refusal to fade away after a devastating electoral performance is ruffling feathers among party figures who are tasked with moving forward and figuring out how to escape from the wilderness in next year's midterms. A number of popular governors, including Illinois' JB Prizker and Kentucky's Andy Beshear, have been making the trek to early primary states with an eye towards 2028, and voters are increasingly eager to elect new faces rather than older establishment figures. Donna Bojarsky, a Democratic consultant, told The Washington Post that 'nobody' in the party is looking to go 'back to 2024' as they look for a way forward against the Republicans. 'The shadow of 2024 is long, and I think all perspectives in the mix believe we need something fresh,' she said. Another strategist Cooper Teboe, said the party's current predicament stems from a sclerosis that has taken hold on account of incumbents refusing to relinquish power to the next generation. 'The core reason the Democratic Party is in the position it is in today is because no new figures, no new ideas, have been allowed to rise up and take hold,' he said. But there is a group eager for Biden and Harris to remain part of the national conversation — Republicans. One GOP consultant who spoke to The Independent said Hunter Biden's recent profanity-laced podcast appearances and the former president's speeches are just what they need to keep his failures in the public eye as his party tries to regain the trust of voters. 'Hunter Biden is just what Democrats need more of going into the midterms,' he said, more than a bit sarcastically.
