By George Omagbemi
Nearly three months after receiving his Letters of Credence to serve as Nigeria’s High Commissioner to South Africa, Femi Fani-Kayode has yet to formally assume duty in Pretoria, leaving Nigeria’s diplomatic mission operating under an acting head.
The situation raises a straightforward question: why is Nigeria’s designated envoy to one of its most strategically important African missions still in Abuja, and when is he expected to take up the assignment?
Fani-Kayode’s ambassadorial journey began with his nomination by President Bola Tinubu among Nigeria’s non-career ambassadorial nominees in 2025. The Senate confirmed him in December 2025. He was initially designated for Germany before requesting a redeployment to South Africa, which the Federal Government subsequently approved.
By July 2026, the major diplomatic requirements appeared to have been completed. Fani-Kayode received his Letters of Credence after South Africa granted the required diplomatic agrément, and he publicly indicated that he would proceed to Pretoria to begin his assignment.
Yet, months later, the Nigerian mission in Pretoria continues to operate under Acting High Commissioner Ambassador Temitope Ajayi, while available diplomatic records do not show Fani-Kayode as having formally assumed the post.
More importantly, there has been no clear public explanation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or Fani-Kayode establishing what is responsible for the delay.
That question becomes more pertinent because the South Africa posting is not an ordinary diplomatic assignment.
Nigeria and South Africa have a complex and strategically important relationship, involving trade, migration, security, consular affairs and the welfare of a large Nigerian community.
The Nigerian mission also has an immediate responsibility to protect and advocate for Nigerians living in South Africa, particularly at a time when concerns over attacks, deaths, immigration issues, repatriation and anti-foreigner sentiments have generated renewed diplomatic attention.
Fani-Kayode himself has recently been involved publicly in the response to the deaths of Nigerian nationals in South Africa. Nigerian authorities said three Nigerians died in separate incidents between September 18 and 21, while the Nigerian Mission called for investigations into the circumstances of the deaths.
Against that background, questions about his physical presence in Pretoria are legitimate.
An ambassador-designate is expected to represent Nigeria, engage the host government, coordinate with the diplomatic mission and, importantly, advocate for the interests and welfare of Nigerian citizens in the country of posting.
That makes his recent political exchanges from Abuja particularly noteworthy.
On October 4, Fani-Kayode publicly criticised former Vice-President and ADC presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar over Atiku’s October 1 Independence Day address, taking particular exception to Atiku’s repeated reference to President Tinubu by his first name, “Bola.” Fani-Kayode described the speech in strongly critical terms and said he was tempted to respond by calling Atiku “Kachalla.”
Atiku’s media aide, Paul Ibe, subsequently responded to Fani-Kayode’s criticism, turning the disagreement into a wider political exchange.
The issue, however, is not whether Fani-Kayode is entitled to express a political opinion.
The bigger question is priority.
At a time when Nigeria’s South African mission has important consular responsibilities and Nigerians in the country are seeking stronger diplomatic advocacy, Nigerians may reasonably ask whether the ambassador-designate’s attention should be concentrated on his impending diplomatic assignment rather than becoming deeply involved in political exchanges in Abuja.
South Africa needs a substantive Nigerian envoy who is physically present, engaging officials, building diplomatic relationships and responding directly to issues affecting Nigerians.
If Fani-Kayode is unable to assume the position within a clearly defined period, the Federal Government should explain why.
If there are outstanding administrative, diplomatic or personal reasons preventing his departure, Nigerians deserve a transparent explanation.
And if there is no immediate timetable for his assumption of duty, the government should consider whether another qualified diplomat should be appointed to take up the post.
Nigeria cannot afford an indefinite arrangement in which a strategically important mission remains under acting leadership while its designated High Commissioner remains in Abuja without a publicly stated explanation.
The question is no longer simply when Fani-Kayode will leave Abuja for Pretoria. It is whether Nigeria is getting the diplomatic representation its citizens in South Africa deserve.
Leave a Reply